diff --git "a/SOCKET_DATA/talkdown-pairs/test_text.txt" "b/SOCKET_DATA/talkdown-pairs/test_text.txt"
--- "a/SOCKET_DATA/talkdown-pairs/test_text.txt"
+++ "b/SOCKET_DATA/talkdown-pairs/test_text.txt"
@@ -1,652 +1,652 @@
-I have seen more biased and tunnel visioned views in this subreddit than any christian I have ever met. I was born and raised catholic but have no religious views now. [SEP] I have seen more biased and tunnel visioned views in this subreddit than any christian I have ever met.
-Exactly. Poor Trump supporters see people like my family making a few hundred thousand a year as the liberal rich enemy. I just wish I could convence them we are on the same side getting screwed by the investment class in the US. After state, federal, fica our tax rate is almost 50% while the truly rich pay 15% maximum and most much less. Really, anyone who works for a living rather than Invests for a living should be on the same side. Edited for typos on mobile. [SEP] Poor Trump supporters see people like my family making a few hundred thousand a year as the liberal rich enemy. I just wish I could convence them we are on the same side getting screwed by the investment class in the US.
-I love your logic: "why won't the fans keep coming out to by a decade old crappy product!" Except for the fact that they have before. There have been many occasions where the fan base was excited and started showing up in big games. Many. Only to have Dolan and his team throw shit in their face in return. It's been like this year after year after year, yet somehow you're surprised team fandom and excitement is dying? And really, only a fraction of those big situations have people thought "wow, this could be it...! This could be the team that does it!" The rest of the times invoked a shrug of the shoulders and a "meh, they're above average. Maybe they can pull something off?" That's what terrible ownership and incompetence has done to a franchise that was once the darling of the city. Lol, I love your optimism calling these "two good years." I mean, I guess they weren't as bad or below average as other years. I guess that makes them good? I love that you blame the casual fans, essentially, even though they're the ones that caught on to how unserious management/ownership has been at winning the last decade while you demand we keep eating the garbage they serve . If the team can put together one legit playoff team (no, not some wild card choke team [that game sold out by the way]) then the fans will be excited and come out. [SEP] I love that you blame the casual fans,
-The point is that you are speaking in vague hyperbole about which policy positions of Hillary's were so much better than Sanders' that minorities came out to support her but not him. What exactly are you talking about? I suspect it had more to do with name recognition and a residual affinity for Bill, but you seem to think it was policy specifics. I am asking what policy specifics you are talking about. [SEP] What exactly are you talking about? I suspect it had more to do with name recognition and a residual affinity for Bill
-> Bullshit, there's nothing civil in how you started this exchange: Are you Martin Shkreli? If so.. okay, but if not; what is your deal? Frankly, I do think his actions are sociopathic, not just for the fraud, or the attempt to cover it up, or his attempt to extort another market to make up for this fraud, or for his behavior while acting as CEO but because he refuses to admit any wrongdoing and tries to make the case that everything he did was for other people. I'm not a psychiatrist, but I'm entitled to my opinion. > You dumb fucking hypocrite. And yet.. you don't see a difference between the two comments here? No one is that obtuse. You are being severely caustic for reasons that I can't rightly determine.. again, unless you are actually Martin Shkreli himself, I have no idea why the stakes are so high for you here. > Right on the heels of patting yourself on the back for wanting to have an earnest discussion you still try to throw jabs? After wading through your mountain of insult laden textual-diarrhea, yea.. I think I deserved one_. Notice, I didn't use profanity, didn't insult your ideas, or your intelligence, nor did I make some projection about your motives, character or capability. I try to stay above the belt, at least. > Why are you so eager to defend the instance companies? I'm not, you're moving the bar. I think Shkreli's behavior is worthy of sentence, I don't care who he gamed to get his money from, he did it improperly. He knew the rules equally well and chose not to follow them, why are you so eager to defend that? > But you don't even admit that it's the insurance companies that were being targeted. You don't even understand the series of events, but still strongly hold an opinion. Yea.. because insurance companies will happily take the loss, and will in no way pass that on to their consumers. It's just some millionaires money, or something? Shkreli's really doing a "Robin Hood" here for us all. Clearly, I don't buy into this narrative. > That makes you a fool. According to your relentless need to project, I'm sure it seems that way. EDIT: psst! You forgot to downvote this one to show me how mad you are. [SEP] And yet.. you don't see a difference between the two comments here? No one is that obtuse. You are being severely caustic for reasons that I can't rightly determine.. again, unless you are actually Martin Shkreli himself, I have no idea why the stakes are so high for you here.
-If I misunderstood you, what definition are you using in the claim that it doesn't exist? And to clarify my point, sure, I could call it sexism. But if I want to really convey what happened in detail, I have to call it sexism, then explain that the guy didn't know what he was talking about, and then explain that he tried to talk over a woman who did know what she was talking about. That's a long sentence that can be replaced by one word, and like I said, I appreciate precise language. I like that English borrows or develops all these new words for very specific things, like to tartle, when one person is making introductions and forgets a name, so they hesitate in the hopes that the person will finish the introduction themselves, or an eirenicon, which is a statement designed to harmonize and bring into accord two conflicting viewpoints. These were all made up at some point, just like every word in every language. But they're fun, concise, and useful at times! [SEP] And to clarify my point, sure, I could call it sexism. But if I want to really convey what happened in detail
-I really don't like that guy... can't wait to see him get rekt! Next episode looks pretty good. [SEP] I really don't like that guy
-hah! i never said it was rustic. please, please read. i said that what the said grandmothers do is called "rustic" because thats a nice way of saying the food is delicious but ugly. i never said you were wrong. the dude's food (im sure it tasted nice) was ugly and i wouldn't serve it the way he did. im just saying.. man.. chill. reading comprehension comes a long way, especially for a person whose username looks like the result of epilepsy [SEP] i never said you were wrong. the dude's food (im sure it tasted nice) was ugly and i wouldn't serve it the way he did. im just saying.. man.. chill.
-I have no evidence. Just making a statement based on how I perceive the world and the people in it. [SEP] have no evidence. Just making a statement based on how I perceive the world and the people in it.
-As a lover of words, all of the words being abused are legitimate words with legitimate usages that have just been appropriated and poisoned by aGGros and Venomists. Each of them has their place in our cultural lexicon and shouldn't be discarded, but used properly. [SEP] all of the words being abused are legitimate words with legitimate usages that have just been appropriated and poisoned
-Young, impressionable children, male and female, are vulnerable to older adults and can be manipulated into having sex too soon. Which part of that do you disagree with, exactly? That it's not true, or that there shouldn't be a law about it? Every case I've ever heard of was a female teacher and a male student. I really can't tell stats because I don't know them, but it happens. Whether you like it or not, women are not the problem here. That is not me telling you you're wrong, I've done that. You have insulted me thoroughly and I really don't know what else you had in mind as a reaction. Women aren't going to take kindly to how you generalize them as weaker and inferior. Especially when I requested that you not use cutesy terms with me. That is why I'm ending this conversation. [SEP] Women aren't going to take kindly to how you generalize them as weaker and inferior.
-well you can't stop a LC lategame if she itemized correctly lol. You have to counterpick her (there's a ton of heroes that can do it, specially certain supports) [SEP] You have to counterpick her (there's a ton of heroes that can do it, specially certain supports)
-Not a professional chef, but keeping fried onions all day does not sound appealing to me. I know you say you are too busy, but hopefully you can spare a minute or two every hour or so... Have you tried doing another quick flash fry of small batches throughout the day? Prep and fry like normal, maybe a bit less time in the fryer depending on how done you want them, and try re-frying a small batch every hour or so to keep up with usage. It only takes a minute or two, and would probably keep them much tastier than the cold soggy onions you are getting now. [SEP] Not a professional chef
-I don't see it that way at all. I know my body isn't shameful, but at the same time, I really wouldn't want to parade my nudity as if it were nothing. Your own body is precious. Being selective about who you show your self to opens up intimacy between that other person and makes the relationship more special. [SEP] Being selective about who you show your self to opens up intimacy between that other person and makes the relationship more special.
-Yeah, this is the electronic music I like. Where you can hear each sound independently, so your attention gets drawn to the different melodies as the song progresses. I feel that the shape of the sound and the timing is what electronic music is all about. I've been listening to house and techno a lot, but I often still can't tell the difference. ps Brutalga Square made me think someone was knocking on my door... [SEP] I feel that the shape of the sound
-Well you have been acting like a twat all through this thread, so I thought I would turn it on you to wind you up. Seems to have worked. The fact is that NFC can be used to turn your phones wi-fi off. That means NFC is not useless as you claimed as it is doing the job your asking of it. All you're doing is arguing over the preferred of turning your wi-fi off. For that there is no right or wrong answer, it's all down to personal preference. [SEP] I thought I would turn it on you to wind you up
-Hey there me again. A good rule of thumb is just not to say "you". Everything was great till that last sentence. This comment is borderline because of it. [SEP] A good rule of thumb is
-Where the hell are you quoting that from? The article is about these scandals giving rise to black and white thinking that is unrealistic. I'm not sure what article you are reading. [SEP] The article is about these scandals giving rise to black and white thinking that is unrealistic.
-Maybe they aren't just as bright gameplay wise. Maybe they can't build great decks every time, but not everybody has the time to learn these things. It would be completely different if the bot made decisions for them- that would actually be taking the skill out of it. But even some of the best players use HA, and sometimes the best decision is not to listen to it, as it isn't perfect. So even with those using it, they won't be building optimally. And while there is definitely a difference between watching someone play and using software, I don't really understand where you would draw the line. You say that looking at tier lists is bad, too, but isn't that different? It doesn't take into account your current deck comp or anything. What if a youtuber cites a HA score as a reason to pick a certain card over another? Picking that card in a similar situation would be indirectly because HA reccomended it. The reason why I think HA is okay in comparasin to p2w is specifically because it is free. If it cost money I really don't think I would be, it would just be people paying for an informational advantage. But in its current state it's free and public access. And I don't think it entirely closes the skill gap either-a casual player will usually be worse off in arena, both in drafting and in the actual battle than someone who has time to play- and I'm okay with that. HA closes the gap that I think matters the most- the information gap. Instead of requiring a large quantity of monetary input from a player to be able to test every card in each class in each deck, HA allows players to get that for free. What it doesn't come with is the actual skill needed to pilot the deck in matches or the knowledge of proper deck construction which it can sometimes advocate against. And I hate the way downvoting is used these days. I don't know how many times I've seen it repeated but I'll say it again. Downvoting isn't for opinions you don't like, its for removing comments that don't encourage discussion- and you've done the exact opposite. I've had a ton of fun and I apologize if anything I've said has come off as rude. [SEP] What it doesn't come with is the actual skill needed to pilot the deck in matches
-Even if Colors was considered good, I never bothered with it for what reason? Wii exclusive. And I own a Wii. [SEP] And I own a Wii.
->Did you even read my original reply? Yeah where you said "It is precisely with distance units that we can measure speed" - and even emphasized distance by italicizing it. Your comment in no way reflects the equity of distance and time, but rather stressed the former as primary. You double, even triple down on this point, "A kilometer is a distance and is used as speed unit measure." Again, neglecting to cite the equity of time and failing to adequately contextualize the importance of time (e.g. km/per hour) From your instance on stressing distance as the main factor in speed, I sought to enlighten you by giving a clear example. >Distance is not static Pay attention to the context in which I said "the distance is static". I was giving an example, specifically where the distance was static and I gave two different times to reach that same distance as a demonstration. >You must not understand physics laws, Lmao, this right here is just a frail ego lashing out. Dont worry, as you get older you'll remove that emotional lens from reading critical commentary and you'll find the ego serves mostly to impede comprehension. [SEP] this right here is just a frail ego lashing out.
-Non-parents seem to have a difficult time understanding the whole "You can't know what it's like until..."/"You can't imagine the bond.." thing. In fact, I see a lot of anger/resentment over these comments. I think I can help. Let me make this clear from the start: You don't and probably cannot understand and or imagine it. So they're right. They were non-parents before they were parents and they didn't understand before either. This is much like when a parent tells a child that they shouldn't rush to grow up because they'll miss being a kid. The kid always thinks the adult is full of shit and they know just how awesome it is to be grown up but in reality they can't imagine the pressures of caring for a family, paying the bills and holding a job. With that said, this bond is not some fucking magical spell. It's not made from unicorn horns. It's evolution at its greatest. Protection of your offspring is assured by an overwhelming instinct to care for them and protect them. Your brain and your hormones are literally taking over and you have little hope of stopping them. Humans call this love. Sure, some parents don't have it but them's the breaks. Mutations or environmental issues can interfere. I think when people say these things they're just trying to explain to you what's happened to them by telling you just how little you can understand where they're coming from. So don't be annoyed. It's just like any other experience that can't accurately be described unless experienced directly. [SEP] . It's just like any other experience that can't accurately be described unless experienced directly.
-> What's wrong with my own opinion? In case you haven't figured it out yet - I don't respect your opinion. >Are you so averse to opinions of individual people that you need confirmation from some faux authority to make you feel warm and happy? Is this a serious question? Yes, I'll take the evidence from a study over the blatherings of a 20 year old keyboard warrior who cannot even differentiate between housing subsidies and rent control. >Opinions never become facts What's wrong with my own opinion? LOL! >...which clearly indicates you had a problem with the second part of the statement. I found both sentences in your statement to be quite stupid and speculative. The first sentence was an authoritative claim that was just flat out dumb and uninformed. The second was a bit of a hedge, but added no value. >No, you have presented your opinion with an emotional charge. And yet, you continue to avoid pointing out where that emotioal charge is. >You are also a hypocrite. Because there can be no doubt that you are asserting something as fact without any evidence, while you condemning me for expressing doubt. [Only 10-15% of Republicans support cuts (read: something milder than dismantling the whole programs) to SS and Medicare.]( http Read more. Learn. Educate yourself. [SEP] Read more. Learn. Educate yourself.
-WASM will absolutely break out of any JS containerization in the long run. If it becomes a standalone tech it absolutely will replace JavaScript in a lot of ways. Sure JavaScript won't get removed completely from browsers for legacy reasons, but few informed people will choose to use it. 1. Doesn't really matter since it's a compile target, so it's no worse than ASM which everyone relies on all the time. 2. That's a bad argument, JS on the backend only exists and is only still used because of JS on the frontend. More code reuse and less learning required. If JS's frontend popularity dropped so would it's backend popularity. It seems like you don't understand that WASM is a compile target, WASM does not cost developer time, besides the initial creation and maintenance of the compiler from your language of choice to WASM. It's actually quite funny that you trot out the "we'd all be using ASM" line, because we ARE, we do all use ASM for everything under the covers (well machine code but whatever), even for non-performance-sensitive tasks. Just like in the long run we will all be using WASM in the browser, just via a compiler or interpreter. Like seriously this confuses me greatly, does no one on this subreddit get that WASM is a compile target and almost no one will write it directly? It will be a great thing to use for all kinds of web tasks assuming you have a compiler from your language of choice, and I know Haskell, Rust, C, Java, C# and C++ all either have working WASM compilers or are currently developing one. [SEP] Like seriously this confuses me greatly, does no one on this subreddit get that WASM is a compile target and almost no one will write it directly?
-> He has repeatedly chastised this sub for being worthless for content creators and people who want constructive talk about the game He's not wrong. You're not addressing the posits. > If the sub has gotten popular, and contributes topics to the front page of reddit, and is one of the most popular subs on reddit... Why change it? Because low effort content is garbage. > We've seen what the sub becomes without 'low effort' content No, you've seen what happens when you try to force the low effort audience to try something better. Don't equate that to a conclusion of superior subreddit enforcement, because it objectively would be better. > There is no compelling reason to change the subreddit after that experiment showed what would occur. Sure, only if your capability of drawing conclusions is faulty. [SEP] Sure, only if your capability of drawing conclusions is faulty.
+I was born and raised catholic but have no religious views now. [SEP] I have seen more biased and tunnel visioned views in this subreddit than any christian I have ever met.
+Exactly. After state, federal, fica our tax rate is almost 50% while the truly rich pay 15% maximum and most much less. Really, anyone who works for a living rather than Invests for a living should be on the same side. Edited for typos on mobile. [SEP] Poor Trump supporters see people like my family making a few hundred thousand a year as the liberal rich enemy. I just wish I could convence them we are on the same side getting screwed by the investment class in the US.
+I love your logic: "why won't the fans keep coming out to by a decade old crappy product!" Except for the fact that they have before. There have been many occasions where the fan base was excited and started showing up in big games. Many. Only to have Dolan and his team throw shit in their face in return. It's been like this year after year after year, yet somehow you're surprised team fandom and excitement is dying? And really, only a fraction of those big situations have people thought "wow, this could be it...! This could be the team that does it!" The rest of the times invoked a shrug of the shoulders and a "meh, they're above average. Maybe they can pull something off?" That's what terrible ownership and incompetence has done to a franchise that was once the darling of the city. Lol, I love your optimism calling these "two good years." I mean, I guess they weren't as bad or below average as other years. I guess that makes them good? essentially, even though they're the ones that caught on to how unserious management/ownership has been at winning the last decade while you demand we keep eating the garbage they serve . If the team can put together one legit playoff team (no, not some wild card choke team [that game sold out by the way]) then the fans will be excited and come out. [SEP] I love that you blame the casual fans,
+The point is that you are speaking in vague hyperbole about which policy positions of Hillary's were so much better than Sanders' that minorities came out to support her but not him. , but you seem to think it was policy specifics. I am asking what policy specifics you are talking about. [SEP] What exactly are you talking about? I suspect it had more to do with name recognition and a residual affinity for Bill
+> Bullshit, there's nothing civil in how you started this exchange: Are you Martin Shkreli? If so.. okay, but if not; what is your deal? Frankly, I do think his actions are sociopathic, not just for the fraud, or the attempt to cover it up, or his attempt to extort another market to make up for this fraud, or for his behavior while acting as CEO but because he refuses to admit any wrongdoing and tries to make the case that everything he did was for other people. I'm not a psychiatrist, but I'm entitled to my opinion. > You dumb fucking hypocrite. > Right on the heels of patting yourself on the back for wanting to have an earnest discussion you still try to throw jabs? After wading through your mountain of insult laden textual-diarrhea, yea.. I think I deserved one_. Notice, I didn't use profanity, didn't insult your ideas, or your intelligence, nor did I make some projection about your motives, character or capability. I try to stay above the belt, at least. > Why are you so eager to defend the instance companies? I'm not, you're moving the bar. I think Shkreli's behavior is worthy of sentence, I don't care who he gamed to get his money from, he did it improperly. He knew the rules equally well and chose not to follow them, why are you so eager to defend that? > But you don't even admit that it's the insurance companies that were being targeted. You don't even understand the series of events, but still strongly hold an opinion. Yea.. because insurance companies will happily take the loss, and will in no way pass that on to their consumers. It's just some millionaires money, or something? Shkreli's really doing a "Robin Hood" here for us all. Clearly, I don't buy into this narrative. > That makes you a fool. According to your relentless need to project, I'm sure it seems that way. EDIT: psst! You forgot to downvote this one to show me how mad you are. [SEP] And yet.. you don't see a difference between the two comments here? No one is that obtuse. You are being severely caustic for reasons that I can't rightly determine.. again, unless you are actually Martin Shkreli himself, I have no idea why the stakes are so high for you here.
+If I misunderstood you, what definition are you using in the claim that it doesn't exist? , I have to call it sexism, then explain that the guy didn't know what he was talking about, and then explain that he tried to talk over a woman who did know what she was talking about. That's a long sentence that can be replaced by one word, and like I said, I appreciate precise language. I like that English borrows or develops all these new words for very specific things, like to tartle, when one person is making introductions and forgets a name, so they hesitate in the hopes that the person will finish the introduction themselves, or an eirenicon, which is a statement designed to harmonize and bring into accord two conflicting viewpoints. These were all made up at some point, just like every word in every language. But they're fun, concise, and useful at times! [SEP] And to clarify my point, sure, I could call it sexism. But if I want to really convey what happened in detail
+... can't wait to see him get rekt! Next episode looks pretty good. [SEP] I really don't like that guy
+hah! i never said it was rustic. please, please read. i said that what the said grandmothers do is called "rustic" because thats a nice way of saying the food is delicious but ugly. reading comprehension comes a long way, especially for a person whose username looks like the result of epilepsy [SEP] i never said you were wrong. the dude's food (im sure it tasted nice) was ugly and i wouldn't serve it the way he did. im just saying.. man.. chill.
+I [SEP] have no evidence. Just making a statement based on how I perceive the world and the people in it.
+As a lover of words, by aGGros and Venomists. Each of them has their place in our cultural lexicon and shouldn't be discarded, but used properly. [SEP] all of the words being abused are legitimate words with legitimate usages that have just been appropriated and poisoned
+Young, impressionable children, male and female, are vulnerable to older adults and can be manipulated into having sex too soon. Which part of that do you disagree with, exactly? That it's not true, or that there shouldn't be a law about it? Every case I've ever heard of was a female teacher and a male student. I really can't tell stats because I don't know them, but it happens. Whether you like it or not, women are not the problem here. That is not me telling you you're wrong, I've done that. You have insulted me thoroughly and I really don't know what else you had in mind as a reaction. Especially when I requested that you not use cutesy terms with me. That is why I'm ending this conversation. [SEP] Women aren't going to take kindly to how you generalize them as weaker and inferior.
+well you can't stop a LC lategame if she itemized correctly lol. [SEP] You have to counterpick her (there's a ton of heroes that can do it, specially certain supports)
+, but keeping fried onions all day does not sound appealing to me. I know you say you are too busy, but hopefully you can spare a minute or two every hour or so... Have you tried doing another quick flash fry of small batches throughout the day? Prep and fry like normal, maybe a bit less time in the fryer depending on how done you want them, and try re-frying a small batch every hour or so to keep up with usage. It only takes a minute or two, and would probably keep them much tastier than the cold soggy onions you are getting now. [SEP] Not a professional chef
+I don't see it that way at all. I know my body isn't shameful, but at the same time, I really wouldn't want to parade my nudity as if it were nothing. Your own body is precious. [SEP] Being selective about who you show your self to opens up intimacy between that other person and makes the relationship more special.
+Yeah, this is the electronic music I like. Where you can hear each sound independently, so your attention gets drawn to the different melodies as the song progresses. and the timing is what electronic music is all about. I've been listening to house and techno a lot, but I often still can't tell the difference. ps Brutalga Square made me think someone was knocking on my door... [SEP] I feel that the shape of the sound
+Well you have been acting like a twat all through this thread, so . Seems to have worked. The fact is that NFC can be used to turn your phones wi-fi off. That means NFC is not useless as you claimed as it is doing the job your asking of it. All you're doing is arguing over the preferred of turning your wi-fi off. For that there is no right or wrong answer, it's all down to personal preference. [SEP] I thought I would turn it on you to wind you up
+Hey there me again. just not to say "you". Everything was great till that last sentence. This comment is borderline because of it. [SEP] A good rule of thumb is
+Where the hell are you quoting that from? I'm not sure what article you are reading. [SEP] The article is about these scandals giving rise to black and white thinking that is unrealistic.
+Maybe they aren't just as bright gameplay wise. Maybe they can't build great decks every time, but not everybody has the time to learn these things. It would be completely different if the bot made decisions for them- that would actually be taking the skill out of it. But even some of the best players use HA, and sometimes the best decision is not to listen to it, as it isn't perfect. So even with those using it, they won't be building optimally. And while there is definitely a difference between watching someone play and using software, I don't really understand where you would draw the line. You say that looking at tier lists is bad, too, but isn't that different? It doesn't take into account your current deck comp or anything. What if a youtuber cites a HA score as a reason to pick a certain card over another? Picking that card in a similar situation would be indirectly because HA reccomended it. The reason why I think HA is okay in comparasin to p2w is specifically because it is free. If it cost money I really don't think I would be, it would just be people paying for an informational advantage. But in its current state it's free and public access. And I don't think it entirely closes the skill gap either-a casual player will usually be worse off in arena, both in drafting and in the actual battle than someone who has time to play- and I'm okay with that. HA closes the gap that I think matters the most- the information gap. Instead of requiring a large quantity of monetary input from a player to be able to test every card in each class in each deck, HA allows players to get that for free. or the knowledge of proper deck construction which it can sometimes advocate against. And I hate the way downvoting is used these days. I don't know how many times I've seen it repeated but I'll say it again. Downvoting isn't for opinions you don't like, its for removing comments that don't encourage discussion- and you've done the exact opposite. I've had a ton of fun and I apologize if anything I've said has come off as rude. [SEP] What it doesn't come with is the actual skill needed to pilot the deck in matches
+Even if Colors was considered good, I never bothered with it for what reason? Wii exclusive. [SEP] And I own a Wii.
+>Did you even read my original reply? Yeah where you said "It is precisely with distance units that we can measure speed" - and even emphasized distance by italicizing it. Your comment in no way reflects the equity of distance and time, but rather stressed the former as primary. You double, even triple down on this point, "A kilometer is a distance and is used as speed unit measure." Again, neglecting to cite the equity of time and failing to adequately contextualize the importance of time (e.g. km/per hour) From your instance on stressing distance as the main factor in speed, I sought to enlighten you by giving a clear example. >Distance is not static Pay attention to the context in which I said "the distance is static". I was giving an example, specifically where the distance was static and I gave two different times to reach that same distance as a demonstration. >You must not understand physics laws, Lmao, Dont worry, as you get older you'll remove that emotional lens from reading critical commentary and you'll find the ego serves mostly to impede comprehension. [SEP] this right here is just a frail ego lashing out.
+Non-parents seem to have a difficult time understanding the whole "You can't know what it's like until..."/"You can't imagine the bond.." thing. In fact, I see a lot of anger/resentment over these comments. I think I can help. Let me make this clear from the start: You don't and probably cannot understand and or imagine it. So they're right. They were non-parents before they were parents and they didn't understand before either. This is much like when a parent tells a child that they shouldn't rush to grow up because they'll miss being a kid. The kid always thinks the adult is full of shit and they know just how awesome it is to be grown up but in reality they can't imagine the pressures of caring for a family, paying the bills and holding a job. With that said, this bond is not some fucking magical spell. It's not made from unicorn horns. It's evolution at its greatest. Protection of your offspring is assured by an overwhelming instinct to care for them and protect them. Your brain and your hormones are literally taking over and you have little hope of stopping them. Humans call this love. Sure, some parents don't have it but them's the breaks. Mutations or environmental issues can interfere. I think when people say these things they're just trying to explain to you what's happened to them by telling you just how little you can understand where they're coming from. So don't be annoyed [SEP] . It's just like any other experience that can't accurately be described unless experienced directly.
+> What's wrong with my own opinion? In case you haven't figured it out yet - I don't respect your opinion. >Are you so averse to opinions of individual people that you need confirmation from some faux authority to make you feel warm and happy? Is this a serious question? Yes, I'll take the evidence from a study over the blatherings of a 20 year old keyboard warrior who cannot even differentiate between housing subsidies and rent control. >Opinions never become facts What's wrong with my own opinion? LOL! >...which clearly indicates you had a problem with the second part of the statement. I found both sentences in your statement to be quite stupid and speculative. The first sentence was an authoritative claim that was just flat out dumb and uninformed. The second was a bit of a hedge, but added no value. >No, you have presented your opinion with an emotional charge. And yet, you continue to avoid pointing out where that emotioal charge is. >You are also a hypocrite. Because there can be no doubt that you are asserting something as fact without any evidence, while you condemning me for expressing doubt. [Only 10-15% of Republicans support cuts (read: something milder than dismantling the whole programs) to SS and Medicare.]( http [SEP] Read more. Learn. Educate yourself.
+WASM will absolutely break out of any JS containerization in the long run. If it becomes a standalone tech it absolutely will replace JavaScript in a lot of ways. Sure JavaScript won't get removed completely from browsers for legacy reasons, but few informed people will choose to use it. 1. Doesn't really matter since it's a compile target, so it's no worse than ASM which everyone relies on all the time. 2. That's a bad argument, JS on the backend only exists and is only still used because of JS on the frontend. More code reuse and less learning required. If JS's frontend popularity dropped so would it's backend popularity. It seems like you don't understand that WASM is a compile target, WASM does not cost developer time, besides the initial creation and maintenance of the compiler from your language of choice to WASM. It's actually quite funny that you trot out the "we'd all be using ASM" line, because we ARE, we do all use ASM for everything under the covers (well machine code but whatever), even for non-performance-sensitive tasks. Just like in the long run we will all be using WASM in the browser, just via a compiler or interpreter. It will be a great thing to use for all kinds of web tasks assuming you have a compiler from your language of choice, and I know Haskell, Rust, C, Java, C# and C++ all either have working WASM compilers or are currently developing one. [SEP] Like seriously this confuses me greatly, does no one on this subreddit get that WASM is a compile target and almost no one will write it directly?
+> He has repeatedly chastised this sub for being worthless for content creators and people who want constructive talk about the game He's not wrong. You're not addressing the posits. > If the sub has gotten popular, and contributes topics to the front page of reddit, and is one of the most popular subs on reddit... Why change it? Because low effort content is garbage. > We've seen what the sub becomes without 'low effort' content No, you've seen what happens when you try to force the low effort audience to try something better. Don't equate that to a conclusion of superior subreddit enforcement, because it objectively would be better. > There is no compelling reason to change the subreddit after that experiment showed what would occur. [SEP] Sure, only if your capability of drawing conclusions is faulty.
 Fallacy after fallacy after fallacy. You fail to see that corporations - absent government interference - must provide goods and/or services which people desire and sell said goods/services on the free market for a price. If they do not do this, than they go bankrupt and fail. Which means that in a truly free market, the only way companies can get rich is by providing for society. Which is a good thing and further illustrates that corporations in actuality have no power; they exist to serve the wants of the people that sustain them. In order to produce goods and services for society, the owner of a company must initially forgo his own consumption and save his income such that he may use his savings to hire laborers and pay said laborers wages. He can now presumably produce more and better product. If this is true, his business will pass the market's test and people will buy more of his goods. He will expand. He is now able to employ more workers and produce more product. Society benefits. In your little Marxian construct, the owner withholds money from his employees and gets richer and richer. However, in reality, if he does this his company suffers; he produces less, or his products are inferior (or both); people stop buying his product and buy somewhere else. He goes bankrupt or he starts spending more so that he can stay alive and stay profitable. Which is what that lovely little construct known as "competition" is all about. If government arbitrarily interferes with this process, it retards the market's ability to function. Money is misallocated into areas where it should not have gone (like to paying workers more than the market rate) and society as a whole is worse off. Further, government sponsored fiat money allows consumption without production, which means corproations are able to make money from the government without actually producing anything that people want. THIS is how the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. You also fail to realize that laborers are free people with the ability to leave their job at any point. This is where their power lies. If a corporation is not catering to an employee's interests, than said employee can leave and work somewhere else. He could even start his own company. He is not forced to do anything. Business is ultimately at the mercy of the consumer, so long as government is not allowed to arbitrarily intervene. [SEP] little Marxist construct.
-Am I? Miss superfan? Just watch. I haven't been wrong this season, it kinda pisses me off. Strong moves. Twistin and ADC is next. [SEP] Am I? Miss superfan?
-Sometimes, it's better not to reveal your stupidity publicly. Their predictions were based on data gathered before the election and continued to update as votes came in. Just like every other major poll, they were wrong. You can say fuck polls and be happy that Trump proved them wrong, but you're making yourself sound like an ass by pretending that Silver had some sort of bias. [SEP] Sometimes, it's better not to reveal your stupidity publicly.
-It might be hard for you to understand how ultimately exhausting this kind of casual, relentless misogyny can be. In the end, you have to choose what's worth the fight. Some chauvinists are so entrenched, so damned blind to their prejudice that absolutely nothing you say will get through. The frustration from these encounters add up, and it would be so easy for a woman to become hardened and bitter. If I thought I could actually have an honest-to-goodness conversation, I'd be delighted to correct misconceptions. But I won't waste my time banging my head against a wall. [SEP] But I won't waste my time banging my head against a wall.
-Overwatch, requires people purchase boxes to keep the game servers live. If everyone just decided that they wanted to play it for free, it would go down. GTA V sells shark cards...You buy in game currency with real money, its how they pay for the servers. Call of duty use to be hosted on the users computer, this is why switching host and lag was never consistent. Call of duty also sells a shit ton of map packs that divides the community in an effort to pay for its servers. Rocket league will be, or is going to be doing a crate system similar to either CS:GO or Overwatch. I also dont think you understand the concept of something.....A console game has free multiplayer, its call local, its called sitting in the living room with your friends, each of you have a controller and playing a game. Its the same way on PC, its called opening up hamachi to fake like you are in the same building, each of you with your own computers, and playing the game. There is a reason the term "Lan party" exist. I dont know if you are too young to not understand that term, but it would explain a lot. The only difference between PC and console, is that PC users found a means to spoof their location.....But, with consoles you only need 1 console, with computers you need several of them plus a host machine....Tell me again how PC multiplayer is "free?" > You can play online, forever, without paying anything extra. Yes YOU can, but SOMEONE cant. I dont know if you understand the concept of money, or that servers cost money, but someone is footing the bill for you. If you are a free to play player, you are a mooch, you contribute NOTHING and someone has to pay your way. You amount to a little kid who has 0 concept of money. They see a toy, they want a toy, they get a toy, and they think said toy is free....But they dont realize that mom or dad had to work for that, had to pay for it, and had to give something up for it so you could play it. Just because you feel entitled to being a special snowflake doesnt mean something is free. Just because you dont pay for something, doesnt mean its free. [SEP] I also dont think you understand the concept of something.....A console game has free multiplayer, its call local, its called sitting in the living room with your friends, each of you have a controller and playing a game. Its the same way on PC, its called opening up hamachi to fake like you are in the same building, each of you with your own computers, and playing the game. There is a reason the term "Lan party" exist. I dont know if you are too young to not understand that term, but it would explain a lot.
-That's a pretty good psycho-analyzation on my entire personality and how I fit into communities based on one of my comments. It's real simple. I wasn't talking down to anyone intentionally. If it wasn't intentional, you could even call it an accident if you will. Our argument is at a paradox where I believe he was talking bullshit when he said everyone knows what it means and I'm doing it wrong. Maybe he was trying to be helpful but I highly doubt it considering there were already many constructive responses to my post as is. We are at a cross roads on whether or not this guy is a douche bag or not and I will do more research before asking this toxic community any more questions to avoid accidental patronization and angry know-it-alls. [SEP] I believe he was talking bullshit when he said everyone knows what it means and I'm doing it wrong
-I meant "few authors" as a percentage, not as a base estimate. Obviously, many authors use stream of consciousness and other similar styles that completely neglect even the most basic of grammar foundations, but they are not in the majority. The majority of writers use grammar as an anchor for their literary style, and find individual ways to personalize it. If every author held grammar above literary style, books wouldn't be worth reading. However, to imply that grammar is not a foundation for writers, is clearly incorrect. And either way, you're implying that my literary background is lacking, which is categorically untrue, and unlike you, I don't lie about how well read I am. "All of the information you need to fake being well read is at your fingertips. I know, I've done it before. I did it through most of high school." [SEP] I don't lie about how well read I am
-Asking questions is better than sitting around doing nothing because you're scared to ask questions. That said, try not to ask questions Google could have answered for you. Spend 30 minutes trying to figure out how to solve a given issue before asking someone about it. [SEP] Asking questions is better than sitting around doing nothing because you're scared to ask questions.
->This doesn't say anything about negligent losses. LOL - do you even understand what liability and negligence are?? Alright, please explain to the rest of us morons what you meant when you said "do you really believe any of your exchanges have liability when it comes to losses?" [SEP] "do you really believe any of your exchanges have liability when it comes to losses?"
-Yes be nice. But do make it obvious that you've run out of patience. Also the agents cant do much [SEP] Also the agents cant do much
-Because They still BELIEVE in the bullshit! OK, cheers, understand what the jaw dropping was referring to now. Yeah, it's a bit of an eye-opener for me too, having to consider this. And you may well be right, perhaps on some level they still do. There are definitely levels of some sort of hypocrisy going on here, whatever the reason. Hip pocket primed in case defense needed. Evil grin appreciated. I raise you with a mocking chuckle. [SEP] I raise you with a mocking chuckle.
-What sort of people upvote this? "sometimes launch"??? What number of rocket attacks would it take for you (and your upvoters) to be too ashamed to use the qualifier 'sometimes'. Obviously the current average of 1000 launches a year doesn't cut it with you. Your rhetoric really makes me despair. [SEP] Your rhetoric really makes me despair.
-1) Your Russell-tea-pot reference gets you style points, but that's not what I'm getting at. It has nothing to do with scripture, either. Go back to Plato, aka the founder of Western philosophy: he posited a super-rational faculty called "nous" which transcended the rational and provided a divine blueprint for the universe. It's called by many names, but all theists adopt some version of the nous story. New Atheists, by contrast, tend to instead place faith in reason. Much as you did in this very post, New Atheists believe that rationality is the faculty that provides us with the closest approximation of "the truth." Two faculties, one story. 2) It's clear you know very little about the scientific method. Science doesn't ever prove anything; it only disproves, and even then only temporarily. No one has "disproven" religious cosmology, because this is impossible. How many Christian nutters link the big bang to Genesis? Too many. As for your points about six days, etc. etc., these are all hand-waived as "allegorical." Besides all this, your arguments are scriptural. At heart, theism makes a single claim: that God exists. [SEP] It's clear you know very little about the scientific method. Science doesn't ever prove anything; it only disproves, and even then only temporarily.
-"You need to prove the that are different. Why do you think the default assumption is that sexual services are in a separate category?" That's ridiculous. a) the world certainly thinks it they are different (except you); b) the number of women who have suffered physical harm through prostitution vs. the number of people suffering physical harm from cutting the grass is vastly different; c) the number of women requiring therapy and medical attention for years afterward is vastly different than from those people who need therapy and mdical attention from cutting grass. The burden is on you - squarely on you - and your complete ridiculousness. Now it is true - something being almost universally held doesn't make it true. But it does help shift he burden of proof. I've cited sources. You've cited baloney. I've made arguments. All you can do is say "prove it more". You've made no argument that cutting the grass is the same as subjecting yourself to the sexual demands of someone. Claiming it doesn't make it so. Your meager attempt to rationalize needed to be challenged. I've pointed out repeatedly, with sources, prostitution is almost exclusively about men using their power over women. It's rampant with slavery, kidnapping, physical and sexual abuse almost always preying on women. If you think the norm is that perfectly normal women just happen to want breast implants so badly that they will engage in wild sex acts in return is a fantasy. Has it ever happened? Maybe. But don't believe what you read. Even in the only documented case of this - Olympian Suzy Favor Hamilton - ultimately needed serious help, and is regretful and remorseful for what she did. You're welcome to keep considering me wrong. Just pointing out you've provided nothing. [SEP] If you think the norm is that perfectly normal women just happen to want breast implants so badly that they will engage in wild sex acts in return is a fantasy.
-Laws are laws because they maintain order. That said it's not even entirely the choice of Activision, it's a precedent-based obligation of IP owners to always make an effort to protect their IP, otherwise their grip on it is legally loosened. If this was a simple "tracing of textures or meshes", or whatever excuse for it being anything but copy and pasting you're using, then they would have to defend it regardless or else they would be more likely to lose in the future on the grounds that they hadn't attempted to defend it previously. Also I'd like to comment that your entire contribution has not in any way demonstrated an understanding of the topic other than stating "Law is dumb ptthhhfffttt." So... Ya know, if you're gonna retort at least read up on the relevant aspects of the legal system and apply some critical thinking. [SEP] Laws are laws because they maintain order.
->You realize that when people like Mewnfare say he's good in the low - mid level, they're not talking about shit like gold and platinum league, right? So, the lower Master League players are sooo many, that they push the winrate of trash heroes like Li Li up, and the one-two true Master players are too few. That makes perfect sense and I'm absolutely biased. Pro players can't be biased, after all, they're pro. >So no, it's not your 4 team mates who are the burden on your team for refusing to "adapt" to your out of place choices. Yeah, neither are they a burden when they cannot adapt to the enemy getting Twilight Dream etc. Adaptability is for noobs! Learn the meta only, good advice. >It's you, the one who goes against everyone else because you're convinced that you know better than them, who is the burden. Yeah, if I'm using a build nobody else does and winning with it, I'm the burden! >you will forever be plagued by this flaming Me? You think I'm only talking about me here? Oh, right, noobs only talk about themselves. Sorry to have wasted your time. >You are incredibly biased towards anyone who prefers the more popular picks and strategies No, just towards those who flame the rest because they don't understand them. You think I'm doing everything in my power to get niche weirdo heroics? >and honestly it is far more likely that their opinions are the correct ones So, statistics in HotsLogs, with thousands of samples from the community, are garbage because 90% of Master League players are noobs, and those who say 56% winrate Nazeebo is tier 4 are right because it's more likely. Ok! [SEP] So, statistics in HotsLogs, with thousands of samples from the community, are garbage because 90% of Master League players are noobs, and those who say 56% winrate Nazeebo is tier 4 are right because it's more likely.
-http ~eecsba1/sp97/reports/eecsba1d/report/telecommute.html http http http http http >Did you read your source? Did you read my post? I acknowledged it was a counter-paper, which made its attempt to damn with faint praise all the more plausible. Net productivity gains at the least are the consensus on this topic in the literature. I'd hoped your own "camp" saying that is the consensus would convince you, but nope. > If you have actual sources, use them. The fact that you've now provided two sources, one with a very specific sample and one that contradicts you, suggests that rather having actually read about this, you're looking for reports to back up your opinions and coming up short. Alternatively, I didn't feel like dragging up half a dozen studies for an arrogant moron using a tablet. But fine, if that's what you want. If you want more, just whistle. >whereas you're apparently insisting that in all situations, working from home is better. News to me. >Both of these points are childish nonsense Actually, again, both of them are pretty well supported by employer statements and research. But hey, who needs actual data on the topic when they can have personal opinions? Now tell me global warming is a fraud because it snowed where you live. >Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to stop feeding the troll. You formed an opinion on this topic in ignorance of any real data, based entirely on your own personal experience, and are now fighting like hell to support your stupidity. Typical redditor I guess. [SEP] You formed an opinion on this topic in ignorance of any real data, based entirely on your own personal experience, and are now fighting like hell to support your stupidity. Typical redditor I guess.
+Just watch. I haven't been wrong this season, it kinda pisses me off. Strong moves. Twistin and ADC is next. [SEP] Am I? Miss superfan?
+Their predictions were based on data gathered before the election and continued to update as votes came in. Just like every other major poll, they were wrong. You can say fuck polls and be happy that Trump proved them wrong, but you're making yourself sound like an ass by pretending that Silver had some sort of bias. [SEP] Sometimes, it's better not to reveal your stupidity publicly.
+It might be hard for you to understand how ultimately exhausting this kind of casual, relentless misogyny can be. In the end, you have to choose what's worth the fight. Some chauvinists are so entrenched, so damned blind to their prejudice that absolutely nothing you say will get through. The frustration from these encounters add up, and it would be so easy for a woman to become hardened and bitter. If I thought I could actually have an honest-to-goodness conversation, I'd be delighted to correct misconceptions. [SEP] But I won't waste my time banging my head against a wall.
+Overwatch, requires people purchase boxes to keep the game servers live. If everyone just decided that they wanted to play it for free, it would go down. GTA V sells shark cards...You buy in game currency with real money, its how they pay for the servers. Call of duty use to be hosted on the users computer, this is why switching host and lag was never consistent. Call of duty also sells a shit ton of map packs that divides the community in an effort to pay for its servers. Rocket league will be, or is going to be doing a crate system similar to either CS:GO or Overwatch. The only difference between PC and console, is that PC users found a means to spoof their location.....But, with consoles you only need 1 console, with computers you need several of them plus a host machine....Tell me again how PC multiplayer is "free?" > You can play online, forever, without paying anything extra. Yes YOU can, but SOMEONE cant. I dont know if you understand the concept of money, or that servers cost money, but someone is footing the bill for you. If you are a free to play player, you are a mooch, you contribute NOTHING and someone has to pay your way. You amount to a little kid who has 0 concept of money. They see a toy, they want a toy, they get a toy, and they think said toy is free....But they dont realize that mom or dad had to work for that, had to pay for it, and had to give something up for it so you could play it. Just because you feel entitled to being a special snowflake doesnt mean something is free. Just because you dont pay for something, doesnt mean its free. [SEP] I also dont think you understand the concept of something.....A console game has free multiplayer, its call local, its called sitting in the living room with your friends, each of you have a controller and playing a game. Its the same way on PC, its called opening up hamachi to fake like you are in the same building, each of you with your own computers, and playing the game. There is a reason the term "Lan party" exist. I dont know if you are too young to not understand that term, but it would explain a lot.
+That's a pretty good psycho-analyzation on my entire personality and how I fit into communities based on one of my comments. It's real simple. I wasn't talking down to anyone intentionally. If it wasn't intentional, you could even call it an accident if you will. Our argument is at a paradox where . Maybe he was trying to be helpful but I highly doubt it considering there were already many constructive responses to my post as is. We are at a cross roads on whether or not this guy is a douche bag or not and I will do more research before asking this toxic community any more questions to avoid accidental patronization and angry know-it-alls. [SEP] I believe he was talking bullshit when he said everyone knows what it means and I'm doing it wrong
+I meant "few authors" as a percentage, not as a base estimate. Obviously, many authors use stream of consciousness and other similar styles that completely neglect even the most basic of grammar foundations, but they are not in the majority. The majority of writers use grammar as an anchor for their literary style, and find individual ways to personalize it. If every author held grammar above literary style, books wouldn't be worth reading. However, to imply that grammar is not a foundation for writers, is clearly incorrect. And either way, you're implying that my literary background is lacking, which is categorically untrue, and unlike you, . "All of the information you need to fake being well read is at your fingertips. I know, I've done it before. I did it through most of high school." [SEP] I don't lie about how well read I am
+That said, try not to ask questions Google could have answered for you. Spend 30 minutes trying to figure out how to solve a given issue before asking someone about it. [SEP] Asking questions is better than sitting around doing nothing because you're scared to ask questions.
+>This doesn't say anything about negligent losses. LOL - do you even understand what liability and negligence are?? Alright, please explain to the rest of us morons what you meant when you said [SEP] "do you really believe any of your exchanges have liability when it comes to losses?"
+Yes be nice. But do make it obvious that you've run out of patience. [SEP] Also the agents cant do much
+Because They still BELIEVE in the bullshit! OK, cheers, understand what the jaw dropping was referring to now. Yeah, it's a bit of an eye-opener for me too, having to consider this. And you may well be right, perhaps on some level they still do. There are definitely levels of some sort of hypocrisy going on here, whatever the reason. Hip pocket primed in case defense needed. Evil grin appreciated. [SEP] I raise you with a mocking chuckle.
+What sort of people upvote this? "sometimes launch"??? What number of rocket attacks would it take for you (and your upvoters) to be too ashamed to use the qualifier 'sometimes'. Obviously the current average of 1000 launches a year doesn't cut it with you. [SEP] Your rhetoric really makes me despair.
+1) Your Russell-tea-pot reference gets you style points, but that's not what I'm getting at. It has nothing to do with scripture, either. Go back to Plato, aka the founder of Western philosophy: he posited a super-rational faculty called "nous" which transcended the rational and provided a divine blueprint for the universe. It's called by many names, but all theists adopt some version of the nous story. New Atheists, by contrast, tend to instead place faith in reason. Much as you did in this very post, New Atheists believe that rationality is the faculty that provides us with the closest approximation of "the truth." Two faculties, one story. 2) No one has "disproven" religious cosmology, because this is impossible. How many Christian nutters link the big bang to Genesis? Too many. As for your points about six days, etc. etc., these are all hand-waived as "allegorical." Besides all this, your arguments are scriptural. At heart, theism makes a single claim: that God exists. [SEP] It's clear you know very little about the scientific method. Science doesn't ever prove anything; it only disproves, and even then only temporarily.
+"You need to prove the that are different. Why do you think the default assumption is that sexual services are in a separate category?" That's ridiculous. a) the world certainly thinks it they are different (except you); b) the number of women who have suffered physical harm through prostitution vs. the number of people suffering physical harm from cutting the grass is vastly different; c) the number of women requiring therapy and medical attention for years afterward is vastly different than from those people who need therapy and mdical attention from cutting grass. The burden is on you - squarely on you - and your complete ridiculousness. Now it is true - something being almost universally held doesn't make it true. But it does help shift he burden of proof. I've cited sources. You've cited baloney. I've made arguments. All you can do is say "prove it more". You've made no argument that cutting the grass is the same as subjecting yourself to the sexual demands of someone. Claiming it doesn't make it so. Your meager attempt to rationalize needed to be challenged. I've pointed out repeatedly, with sources, prostitution is almost exclusively about men using their power over women. It's rampant with slavery, kidnapping, physical and sexual abuse almost always preying on women. Has it ever happened? Maybe. But don't believe what you read. Even in the only documented case of this - Olympian Suzy Favor Hamilton - ultimately needed serious help, and is regretful and remorseful for what she did. You're welcome to keep considering me wrong. Just pointing out you've provided nothing. [SEP] If you think the norm is that perfectly normal women just happen to want breast implants so badly that they will engage in wild sex acts in return is a fantasy.
+That said it's not even entirely the choice of Activision, it's a precedent-based obligation of IP owners to always make an effort to protect their IP, otherwise their grip on it is legally loosened. If this was a simple "tracing of textures or meshes", or whatever excuse for it being anything but copy and pasting you're using, then they would have to defend it regardless or else they would be more likely to lose in the future on the grounds that they hadn't attempted to defend it previously. Also I'd like to comment that your entire contribution has not in any way demonstrated an understanding of the topic other than stating "Law is dumb ptthhhfffttt." So... Ya know, if you're gonna retort at least read up on the relevant aspects of the legal system and apply some critical thinking. [SEP] Laws are laws because they maintain order.
+>You realize that when people like Mewnfare say he's good in the low - mid level, they're not talking about shit like gold and platinum league, right? So, the lower Master League players are sooo many, that they push the winrate of trash heroes like Li Li up, and the one-two true Master players are too few. That makes perfect sense and I'm absolutely biased. Pro players can't be biased, after all, they're pro. >So no, it's not your 4 team mates who are the burden on your team for refusing to "adapt" to your out of place choices. Yeah, neither are they a burden when they cannot adapt to the enemy getting Twilight Dream etc. Adaptability is for noobs! Learn the meta only, good advice. >It's you, the one who goes against everyone else because you're convinced that you know better than them, who is the burden. Yeah, if I'm using a build nobody else does and winning with it, I'm the burden! >you will forever be plagued by this flaming Me? You think I'm only talking about me here? Oh, right, noobs only talk about themselves. Sorry to have wasted your time. >You are incredibly biased towards anyone who prefers the more popular picks and strategies No, just towards those who flame the rest because they don't understand them. You think I'm doing everything in my power to get niche weirdo heroics? >and honestly it is far more likely that their opinions are the correct ones Ok! [SEP] So, statistics in HotsLogs, with thousands of samples from the community, are garbage because 90% of Master League players are noobs, and those who say 56% winrate Nazeebo is tier 4 are right because it's more likely.
+http ~eecsba1/sp97/reports/eecsba1d/report/telecommute.html http http http http http >Did you read your source? Did you read my post? I acknowledged it was a counter-paper, which made its attempt to damn with faint praise all the more plausible. Net productivity gains at the least are the consensus on this topic in the literature. I'd hoped your own "camp" saying that is the consensus would convince you, but nope. > If you have actual sources, use them. The fact that you've now provided two sources, one with a very specific sample and one that contradicts you, suggests that rather having actually read about this, you're looking for reports to back up your opinions and coming up short. Alternatively, I didn't feel like dragging up half a dozen studies for an arrogant moron using a tablet. But fine, if that's what you want. If you want more, just whistle. >whereas you're apparently insisting that in all situations, working from home is better. News to me. >Both of these points are childish nonsense Actually, again, both of them are pretty well supported by employer statements and research. But hey, who needs actual data on the topic when they can have personal opinions? Now tell me global warming is a fraud because it snowed where you live. >Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to stop feeding the troll. [SEP] You formed an opinion on this topic in ignorance of any real data, based entirely on your own personal experience, and are now fighting like hell to support your stupidity. Typical redditor I guess.
 SO many questions lately in threads could be answered via google. At least half of these questions could be answered within seconds (Do stimulants cause weight loss?). Some people even admit their ignorance by not knowing what words they are using even mean. Our attention is precious and we should start to treat it as such. We just passed 2000 members and things are starting to get a bit crazy. So far, the mods are taking a hands-off approach...but we might have to start monitoring things closer...and we REALLY don't want to do this (as mentioned in another thread today computers/Reddit isn't the best for ADHD). Us helpful /r/adhd commenters can only answer/re-answer so many questions repeatedly trying to be helpful until we hit our limit. The FAQ should help alleviate this once we figure out how to allow others to edit it easily. I am starting to see the patience of many of our active commenters wearing thin and I would hate to see them go (or reduce their commenting). I don't know what we can do to make things better at this time... EDIT: To the OP. Welcome to the community! No fault of yours, but the community is starting to see people rely on /r/ADHD to answer many questions that are simply factual. Enjoy the new awareness being able to explain many of your current/past actions through the veil of ADHD! [SEP] At least half of these questions could be answered within seconds (on google)
-I respect opinions, but just because your friends haven't played the newest dlc yet, doesnt indicate wether the map is good or not, nor does the fact that they "post here" or you've played with them for 8 years. I completely understand that if you can't quite get the hang of a map, you think it's bad. I felt the same about origins until I learned it's EZ PZ as well. In the end, fun is a relative term depending on that person. If you are as good as you say you are, you know that round 14 isnt that good and that you are in the minority of people who have played that map who can actually get to high rounds. The map isn't hard. I've only played it 3 times on solo and I've already beaten the easter egg and gotten to round 30+ before I downed myself [SEP] I've only played it 3 times on solo and I've already beaten the easter egg and gotten to round 30+ before I downed myself
-I think the context was, "It's not a big deal to say a few words into a microphone, so why the drama"? I don't have a problem with that comment so much as the response, which was this: >To you, sure. To me it would be a very big deal, and would probably trigger a panic attack. >It’s all part of that whole “people are different” thing. You get that, right? But what really bothers me is that the person who talked about closing announcements was called Space Turtle, and the person who responded to them was called Great A'Tuin, which is the name of a giant space turtle in the Discworld novels by Terry Pratchett. I'm not saying it's a giant conspiracy, but I find that very unlikely. [SEP] You get that, right?
-Awww it's just too cute how hard you're trying to be like all cool and stuff here... I mean, downright adorable even! Here... Have a cookie... [SEP] Here... Have a cookie...
-sorry i dont play shit tanks other than the a-43 cause its in my way :) [SEP] sorry i dont play shit tanks
-Dude, at this point I don't even know if you're trolling... You post a list of a really bad deck, then proceed to say it wins games. After a random guy on the internet takes time out of his life to explain to you the basics of the commander you play, you still want to stick to your bad list. Well, if you like your list then stick to it an have fun with it. If the people you play with play equally bad decks, yes you will win a few (I give you the benefit of the doubt here). [SEP] You post a list of a really bad deck
+I respect opinions, but just because your friends haven't played the newest dlc yet, doesnt indicate wether the map is good or not, nor does the fact that they "post here" or you've played with them for 8 years. I completely understand that if you can't quite get the hang of a map, you think it's bad. I felt the same about origins until I learned it's EZ PZ as well. In the end, fun is a relative term depending on that person. If you are as good as you say you are, you know that round 14 isnt that good and that you are in the minority of people who have played that map who can actually get to high rounds. The map isn't hard. [SEP] I've only played it 3 times on solo and I've already beaten the easter egg and gotten to round 30+ before I downed myself
+I think the context was, "It's not a big deal to say a few words into a microphone, so why the drama"? I don't have a problem with that comment so much as the response, which was this: >To you, sure. To me it would be a very big deal, and would probably trigger a panic attack. >It’s all part of that whole “people are different” thing. But what really bothers me is that the person who talked about closing announcements was called Space Turtle, and the person who responded to them was called Great A'Tuin, which is the name of a giant space turtle in the Discworld novels by Terry Pratchett. I'm not saying it's a giant conspiracy, but I find that very unlikely. [SEP] You get that, right?
+Awww it's just too cute how hard you're trying to be like all cool and stuff here... I mean, downright adorable even! [SEP] Here... Have a cookie...
+other than the a-43 cause its in my way :) [SEP] sorry i dont play shit tanks
+Dude, at this point I don't even know if you're trolling... , then proceed to say it wins games. After a random guy on the internet takes time out of his life to explain to you the basics of the commander you play, you still want to stick to your bad list. Well, if you like your list then stick to it an have fun with it. If the people you play with play equally bad decks, yes you will win a few (I give you the benefit of the doubt here). [SEP] You post a list of a really bad deck
 Right. The necon consensus and neocon propaganda narratives that dominate the media. Well it's always interesting to meet "liberals" who support the war crime of invading Iraq ("to protect the Iraqi people from Saddam"), the destruction of Libya ("to protect the Libyan people from Gaddhafi"), and the destruction of Syria ("to protect the Syrian people from Assad by replacing their government with ISIS and Al Qaeda"). If you know anything about US history you know that we never base our foreign policy on human rights. That is the pablum they serve to the weak minded domestic citizenry to manufacture consensus. The fact that you cite these as reasons for American intervention just proves your gullibility. We know the reasons for our intervention in Syria which had been planned for over a decade. Some of it is outlined in Hillary's leaked State Dept. cable from 2010 about how it would advance Israel's foreign policy objectives. Other reasons include the pipeline from Qatar to Turkey that was thwarted. The regional ambitions of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey also played a role. But if you're going to spout off all this "we're doing it to help the Syrian people" nonsense like some sort of infantilized teenager, then there's no basis for a discussion. The US has no qualms funding and training death squads, providing kill lists to genocidal regimes, training right wing dictatorships how to torture, using white phosphorous and cluster bombs, cozying up to dictators who use chemical weapons on their own people (when Saddam was our buddy), and exterminating civilian populations. For Americans to spout off about how we're somehow a white knight come to save the day, just shows how succeptible to propaganda you are. You live in a Truman show America constructed for you by the American media. [SEP] For Americans to spout off about how we're somehow a white knight come to save the day, just shows how susceptible to propaganda you are. You live in a Truman show America constructed for you by the American media.
-Just because they worship "cold gods" doesn't mean they are around. You don't see the Father, R'hollor, The Drowned God walking around and people still worship them. The story of the Night's King is thousands of years old as well. The Night King is a made up character for the show. [SEP] The story of the Night's King is thousands of years old as well. The Night King is a made up character for the show.
-Statistics are made up of individual pieces of information, or data. The data I provided is very real. Maybe to you it's anecdotal or an outlier but to me it's a reality. And excuse me for assuming somebody with Noah in their username is a man trying to explain to me, a woman, feminism. You don't seem too dense, maybe you'll see the irony in that. [SEP] And excuse me for assuming somebody with Noah in their username is a man trying to explain to me, a woman, feminism.
-Like most Communists you fail to respond to the actual question. It's adorable that you think it's applicable to anything other than long-winded books, but if we want to make things better, why would we go back to a system that failed so spectacularly every time it's been attempted? [SEP] Like most Communists you fail to respond to the actual question.
-My gf doesn't eat meat but I do. whenever we go out for food with people and it happens to come up that she's doesn't eat meat we hear all about how people can't live without meat and so many people asking where she gets her protein. Also so many Fucking Bacon memes come up in facebook . I like eating meat but meat eaters are way more annoying about their food than non meat eaters [SEP] so many people asking where she gets her protein
->you push new trends that you do I do like all of the new things out, probably because they seem fresh and exciting, and I tend to gravitate more toward colorful natural looks and less on eyeliner and eyebrows. >But no one is vilifying women who pass on the Kim Kardashian look I'll have to agree to disagree. My blog is primarily for people interested in the beauty industry , bloggers, cosmo professionals, creators, etc and I have heard so much about this issue that it sparked me to write this. It is a very common issue for content creators at the moment. Perhaps you're not in the community so you are not aware. But I am glad you said this, you're right that some readers may not understand the references or inferences I make here, and I need to become more aware of who the audience is when I share articles. >women who do follow that trend are not changing the beauty standard I'm not sure what HAES is. The women are not changing the beauty standard. Media and culture are. It is changed already. Scroll through Instagram today and check it out. :) We can agree to disagree, but in my circles, this is my point of view. I am seeing primarily ethnic centered looks that are inspired by these celebutards. Most attempts to do things otherwise are just not popular, mainstream, in style, etc. Maybe I am more attuned to this than others but I didn't think so. edit to add: the issues I discuss in this article are also echoed over at /r/muacjdiscussion very frequently as well. if you are interested I do like the sub. [SEP] Perhaps you're not in the community so you are not aware. But I am glad you said this, you're right that some readers may not understand the references or inferences I make here, and I need to become more aware of who the audience is when I share articles.
-Yes I know the reason. A donate button with a majority of the donations go to the modder is the best solution. In the modding community anything you have to pay for dies very quickly. Whereas when it is free and have a donate link, you generate some revenue. If they just added this to the steam workshop this solves all the problems with funding mods [SEP] In the modding community anything you have to pay for dies very quickly. Whereas when it is free and have a donate link, you generate some revenue.
-In my ^^humble experience moderating /r/Arabs, if you begin from the position that it's "more up to the users to decide what they want", then you're doomed from the start. Especially when moderating anything middle-east related where there are a thousand competing religious and political agendas. You need some sort of vision — some sort of leitkultur, no matter how minimal, to make something like this work. Also, don't underestimate how many users will dedicate their time and resources to push their agenda and sabotage everything. Seriously, you will be amazed what free time, boredom and zealotry can do. My spirit is broken. [SEP] My spirit is broken.
-> everything he was charged with. That everything else this is circular reasoning. your argument boils down to, Look at all those charges, they must be railroading an innocent man. except we've been given almost no details of what went down and why. so basically what doing is superimposing the scenario that would make you the maddest, and wanting it to be true. here's what i suggest: copy all the text from the story, paste it into a word doc, and one by one go thru every sentence of the story and delete every statement that doesn't look like a verifiable detail. what you'll have left is only a few things, most prominent of which will be the list of charges. then ask yourself: if this stripped down list of facts was all you knew about a certain event, would you be inclined to assume all the same things you're assuming now? [SEP] so basically what doing is superimposing the scenario that would make you the maddest, and wanting it to be true.
-I get what you're saying, and you are obviously intelligent. But where we part ways is that I do not believe his goal is to present himself as superior. It is to offer a reason for certain behaviors. He's not decrying those things in themselves but the motivation of fear that, say, pushes certain people into hostility toward others who are different and/or pushes them into a militarized attitude toward guns versus a recreational one. I'm know you can appreciate this distinction. [SEP] He's not decrying those things in themselves but the motivation of fear
-> It's not a farm when someone needs to spend money for it to happen. Hey look at that, and actual valid point, impressive. > Plat doesen't spontaneously combust. It's not a resource someone gets and trades ingame, which is why you're wrong. There's no way to farm plat without someone shelling out first, which is why plat being necessary is an issue. And DE needs to make money. People who spend plat are people who value time over money. It's one of those necessary evils. > Selling for plat isn't playing the game since someone has to actually buy it, making it a resource necessary for progression that's unfarmable. We have been over this, the term farm is a loose term that you can't cherry pick what does and doesn't apply to. People can say they farm for plat by farming out trade items and obtaining plat. > No, instead the game simply locks out of 90% of the content and builds. Builds yes, content no. You can do any mission with any frame. There is no gameplay locked behind by not having a certain frame. An argument could be made that Nidus being the exception but at the moment the only thing you need him for is sitting in a chair. [SEP] Hey look at that, and actual valid point, impressive.
+Just because they worship "cold gods" doesn't mean they are around. You don't see the Father, R'hollor, The Drowned God walking around and people still worship them. [SEP] The story of the Night's King is thousands of years old as well. The Night King is a made up character for the show.
+Statistics are made up of individual pieces of information, or data. The data I provided is very real. Maybe to you it's anecdotal or an outlier but to me it's a reality. You don't seem too dense, maybe you'll see the irony in that. [SEP] And excuse me for assuming somebody with Noah in their username is a man trying to explain to me, a woman, feminism.
+It's adorable that you think it's applicable to anything other than long-winded books, but if we want to make things better, why would we go back to a system that failed so spectacularly every time it's been attempted? [SEP] Like most Communists you fail to respond to the actual question.
+My gf doesn't eat meat but I do. whenever we go out for food with people and it happens to come up that she's doesn't eat meat we hear all about how people can't live without meat and . Also so many Fucking Bacon memes come up in facebook . I like eating meat but meat eaters are way more annoying about their food than non meat eaters [SEP] so many people asking where she gets her protein
+>you push new trends that you do I do like all of the new things out, probably because they seem fresh and exciting, and I tend to gravitate more toward colorful natural looks and less on eyeliner and eyebrows. >But no one is vilifying women who pass on the Kim Kardashian look I'll have to agree to disagree. My blog is primarily for people interested in the beauty industry , bloggers, cosmo professionals, creators, etc and I have heard so much about this issue that it sparked me to write this. It is a very common issue for content creators at the moment. >women who do follow that trend are not changing the beauty standard I'm not sure what HAES is. The women are not changing the beauty standard. Media and culture are. It is changed already. Scroll through Instagram today and check it out. :) We can agree to disagree, but in my circles, this is my point of view. I am seeing primarily ethnic centered looks that are inspired by these celebutards. Most attempts to do things otherwise are just not popular, mainstream, in style, etc. Maybe I am more attuned to this than others but I didn't think so. edit to add: the issues I discuss in this article are also echoed over at /r/muacjdiscussion very frequently as well. if you are interested I do like the sub. [SEP] Perhaps you're not in the community so you are not aware. But I am glad you said this, you're right that some readers may not understand the references or inferences I make here, and I need to become more aware of who the audience is when I share articles.
+Yes I know the reason. A donate button with a majority of the donations go to the modder is the best solution. If they just added this to the steam workshop this solves all the problems with funding mods [SEP] In the modding community anything you have to pay for dies very quickly. Whereas when it is free and have a donate link, you generate some revenue.
+In my ^^humble experience moderating /r/Arabs, if you begin from the position that it's "more up to the users to decide what they want", then you're doomed from the start. Especially when moderating anything middle-east related where there are a thousand competing religious and political agendas. You need some sort of vision — some sort of leitkultur, no matter how minimal, to make something like this work. Also, don't underestimate how many users will dedicate their time and resources to push their agenda and sabotage everything. Seriously, you will be amazed what free time, boredom and zealotry can do. [SEP] My spirit is broken.
+> everything he was charged with. That everything else this is circular reasoning. your argument boils down to, Look at all those charges, they must be railroading an innocent man. except we've been given almost no details of what went down and why. here's what i suggest: copy all the text from the story, paste it into a word doc, and one by one go thru every sentence of the story and delete every statement that doesn't look like a verifiable detail. what you'll have left is only a few things, most prominent of which will be the list of charges. then ask yourself: if this stripped down list of facts was all you knew about a certain event, would you be inclined to assume all the same things you're assuming now? [SEP] so basically what doing is superimposing the scenario that would make you the maddest, and wanting it to be true.
+I get what you're saying, and you are obviously intelligent. But where we part ways is that I do not believe his goal is to present himself as superior. It is to offer a reason for certain behaviors. that, say, pushes certain people into hostility toward others who are different and/or pushes them into a militarized attitude toward guns versus a recreational one. I'm know you can appreciate this distinction. [SEP] He's not decrying those things in themselves but the motivation of fear
+> It's not a farm when someone needs to spend money for it to happen. > Plat doesen't spontaneously combust. It's not a resource someone gets and trades ingame, which is why you're wrong. There's no way to farm plat without someone shelling out first, which is why plat being necessary is an issue. And DE needs to make money. People who spend plat are people who value time over money. It's one of those necessary evils. > Selling for plat isn't playing the game since someone has to actually buy it, making it a resource necessary for progression that's unfarmable. We have been over this, the term farm is a loose term that you can't cherry pick what does and doesn't apply to. People can say they farm for plat by farming out trade items and obtaining plat. > No, instead the game simply locks out of 90% of the content and builds. Builds yes, content no. You can do any mission with any frame. There is no gameplay locked behind by not having a certain frame. An argument could be made that Nidus being the exception but at the moment the only thing you need him for is sitting in a chair. [SEP] Hey look at that, and actual valid point, impressive.
 http Start with the vanity fairs article and then work your way through his forbes.com mentions predating his 'fame' recently (30 under 30 etc) He made his money recognising bad FDA approved drugs and shorting them. He had no hereditary wealth (son of poor albanian immigrants) and has a genius intellect (measured at 150-160) He became a successful biotech ceo because he knew how to quickly identify when firms were making bad, bloated or useless drugs. (Came up through Cramer-berkowitz, got recognised as insanely talented in biotech) His company used the price hike for a self admittedly shitty drug to increase research spending to 60-70% compared to 15% which other large big pharma types do. He's researching treatment improvements to rare diseases that are economically unprofitable and are accordingly unprovided by the market. He doesn't take a salary from his company. He's no saint, but he's no sinner. And if that shit doesn't sell you on him, check out his discussion with a HIV patient on his screencast. http It starts off heated but then when Shkreli outlines how he's going to innovate the pharmaceutical world. Crucially, the articles that feature him predating all this troll stuff and price hike stuff, show quite clearly that he was always in it for helping with diseases, treatment resistant depression and so on. He has a weird form of sarcasm and might have some major issues regarding an inability to relate socially, but there's a reason why his investors and research doctors and the like stick to him so rigidly. I think he also really wants to be liked as well. He really knows his shit, he can find frauds, and he wants to make a fuckload of money solving rare disease problems the market is not supplying. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Edit: For the inevitable media companies seeking to leech content such as my comment from reddit without my permission over the next 72 hours: please read [SEP] He has a weird form of sarcasm and might have some major issues regarding an inability to relate socially, but there's a reason >why his investors and research doctors and the like stick to him so rigidly.
-lmfao. Check the citation above: "France will be able to build atomic weapons of all kinds and within every type of range. At relatively low cost, she will be in a position to produce large quantities of such weapons, with fast breeders providing an abundant supply of the plutonium required. Lucky Europe and Luck France - at long last in a position to engage in an enlarged nuclear deterrent of their own, thus guaranteeing their security." -General Jean Thiry, advisor to the French Atomic Energy Commission: Hey look, here it is in another peer-reviewed publication http And here is his follow up in case someone thought he was being misquoted "In 1987 General Thiry confirmed his statement and declared: “One can always get plutonium, especially if one de- velops ... . This is apparently an idea that one should not say [openly] because it is not moral, but I defend Creys-Malville [Superph´enix]and the fast breeder reactor type, because there you have plutonium of extraordinary military quality. " [SEP] France will be able to build atomic weapons of all kinds and within every type of range. At relatively low cost, she will be in a position to produce large quantities of such weapons, with fast breeders providing an abundant supply of the plutonium required. Lucky Europe and Luck France - at long last in a position to engage in an enlarged nuclear deterrent of their own, thus guaranteeing their security
-> No, but 1. By staying there you have already agreed to pay [whether you pay or not is a different story], and So the issue is that the United States forcibly naturalized you as a citizen, and didn't offer you the chance to sign a contract the instant you emerged from the womb? You can agree not to pay the US any more taxes, and leave. Just like you can agree not to pay a hotel anything, and leave. Now, how harsh the sun is outside the hotel, the fact that there aren't any nicer hotels in town, etc. is not really any concern of the hotel. It's your choice. > 2. The agency that actually takes your money and gives it back to the hotel is the government. Do you acknowledge that in this country, at least in theory, the government is a democratically elected expression of the will of the people? Compared to, say, a monarchy or a totalitarian state? When 10 people on a desert island form a tribal council, they've formed a government. If one of them dissents and doesn't want to participate, he is free to leave to another part of the island. If he decides to stay and agrees to abide by the council's rules, then isn't it only fair that he holds up his side of the bargain? Again, I bring up the distinction with North Korea, or perhaps a monarchy. Your parents birthed you in the USA, without consulting your preferences. They thrust that unfortunate fate upon you. However, the people of the USA have been so kind as to allow you the option of leaving if you don't like the system we've set up. Under these circumstances, your decision to stay is a voluntary one. No one is forcing you to stay here except your own preferences of convenience, as you've stated above. So in what way is the government's request for you to uphold your end of the citizenship contract any different from a hotel's request that you pay the bill if you choose to stay the night? Yes, I know the word "g-o-v-e-r-n-m-e-n-t" is spelled differently from the word "h-o-t-e-l". I mean other than that. > In other words, because the there isn't a better country, that means we are already the best-possible country and can't get any better. Nope, not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that as you look around the world and look for a better, more equitable, market-friendly environment, you might realize that there aren't actually that many. And rather than automatically assuming that all the financiers, economists, politicians, and businessmen of the rest of the world are stupid and fail to see the simple ingenuity of "just letting the market work", perhaps there are other forces in play, and other reasons for why the world is the way it is. [SEP] nd rather than automatically assuming that all the financiers, economists, politicians, and businessmen of the rest of the world are stupid and fail to see the simple ingenuity of "just letting the market work"
-We invented a system called GPA to determine if they were as, more, or successful at the "mission" (?) as others in learning environments. It has nothing to do with having "decent" grades, it has to do with relative performance. And yes, GPA is not a perfect system. But that doesn't mean that since it's already imperfect we should throw it out the window instead of analyzing what could be done to improve it. You're just saying it's worthless as a justification for other people to get in. I'm not a low intelligence person for having this view. I'm a biological engineering student at an ivy that is internationally renowned for its engineering program. Your points are riddled with fallacy if you think that calling me stupid wins you the argument. I am able to refute and reply, but I really don't see the point if you are so unabashedly willing to start every conversation with the conviction that you can never be wrong. I am wrong, frequently. It's how one learns about everything. If you are unable to see the nuance in things or the fact that there are a million reasons people judge people and systematically maximizing ("reverse racism", which isn't a thing) that through AA and parity movements makes the situation worse, I see no possible reason that you would have any genuine interest in sharing ideas with me, as you can't stop yourself from spouting on about how racist and sexist I am for being analytical. Even worse, you think it justifies your positions by putting words in my mouth. It is possible to disagree on things and not be a gaping cockhole about it. I probably have to bring things down to your level here, so how about this. I dare you to put aside your distaste for my positions and make any genuine inquiry. Double dog dare ya. All you gotta do is say, "Okay, I'm listening" in the reply and I'll refute all of your points. Maybe I'll learn something too, and change my view if I come to see your reasoning follows stronger. [SEP] All you gotta do is say, "Okay, I'm listening" in the reply and I'll refute all of your points. Maybe I'll learn something too, and change my view if I come to see your reasoning follows stronger.
-Yes, but my condescension (which was entirely deserved) accompanied a rebuttal. You ignored the rebuttal and focused on the insult, presumably because your point was fairly incontrovertibly disproven. As to the second part... I'm afraid you misunderstand. I said don't ignore the part of my comment which is relevant. I didn't do that. I addressed your point, but also pointed out your silly lack of capitalisation. You replied solely to the part of my comment which was irrelevant. [SEP] You replied solely to the part of my comment which was irrelevant.
-You are 13! I'm 34 and I will trade you my life for your straight up, car bank account, age, ect. Nothing matters when you are 13. You can fail school and you know what happens? you get to do it all over again. Seriously even if you get kicked out of school you can still find a job, a SO, some place to live, and just have a life in general (a happy one too). Actually, I think your problem is your parents. They have bad habits that cause problems instead of prevent them, they freak out about them, and over the years you have learned to freak out about them mimicking your parents. Your depression and anxiety is a learned behavior when it comes down to it. You could medicate it, but can you medicate a learned behavior? You need to spend time with people that have good habits, and learn that shit. [SEP] Nothing matters when you are 13.
-Democracy is a process, not an event. There's been countless explanations that not going ahead with Brexit is not anti-democratic. For starters, an important part of the constitutional law of the UK involves MPs not acting against the interests of the people, even if the people want them to. [SEP] an important part of the constitutional law of the UK involves MPs not acting against the interests of the people
-I like the show too, but there's definitely a subset of really obnoxious fans who like to jerk themselves off over how smart they are for understanding a sci-fi cartoon about an alcoholic scientist and his hapless sidekick. There may not be a lot of them, but they're certainly loud enough to make it seem like there are. [SEP] but there's definitely a subset of really obnoxious fans
-That is the only point he presented for why travel will not become much faster. If there were other points maybe he should state them? Maybe you aren't following the comment chain? The original poster said traffic would be worse, the next guy said there shouldn't be a clog, which is correct because if you see how traffic jams actually happen a lot of it is preventable if there was some sort of interconnectivity between cars telling each one how and when to move so that there aren't artificial jams created by someone not picking up speed when they should or slowing down because the guy in front of them wasn't paying attention and stopped suddenly. He said you can't fit every single car on the bridge at once, but that's not the point. The rate of new cars entering and old cars leaving will be substantially increased so overall capacity won't really matter. I don't think either of you understand what it would mean to have self-driving cars. >So if you think traffic is going to be a thing of the past then you are living in fantasy land. I never said that. It's pretty clear you don't really understand the reality we are working towards. If a bridge can only fit 500 cars at a time but those cars are networked and communicating between one another, they will pour out of both ends much faster than they do now, and what we view as "rush hour" will eventually become like regular midday traffic with no comparable "backups". It's like the difference between moving 10 feet every 5 minutes and stopping at a stop sign before you continue on your way. Btw, downvote is not the disagree button. [SEP] Maybe you aren't following the comment chain?
-I know you are going nuts with trying to call me out on stuff, and that is fine, but would you disagree with that? I admit my original post was more blunt, but I did clarify almost everything in the comments. Would you disagree that for most people in a long term committed relationship that this fetish is unsustainable? if so, then we have a difference of opinion. [SEP] Would you disagree that for most people in a long term committed relationship that this fetish is unsustainable?
-No worries mate, u gave me a genuine laugh irl. "With his career stalled, he took out a £30,000 bank loan,[4] secured by a life insurance policy, to buy his way into the fledgling March team as a Formula Two (F2) driver in 1971. Because of his family's disapproval he had an ongoing feud with them over his racing ambitions and abandoned further contact." http [SEP] gave me a genuine laugh irl.
-What about what about whataboutism? Get out of here with your apologist BS. Russia taken taken step after step in recent years to undermine democracy, weaken Western alliances, and encourage neofascist kleptocracy all over the world. They've committed chemical attacks in foreignp nations, assassinated political opponents, invaded and annexed their neighbors, and in a wild turn of events seem to have brought the ruling US political party to it's knees after throwing the election in its favor, perhaps their biggest victory since 1945. [SEP] What about what about whataboutism?
+lmfao. Check the citation above: "." -General Jean Thiry, advisor to the French Atomic Energy Commission: Hey look, here it is in another peer-reviewed publication http And here is his follow up in case someone thought he was being misquoted "In 1987 General Thiry confirmed his statement and declared: “One can always get plutonium, especially if one de- velops ... . This is apparently an idea that one should not say [openly] because it is not moral, but I defend Creys-Malville [Superph´enix]and the fast breeder reactor type, because there you have plutonium of extraordinary military quality. " [SEP] France will be able to build atomic weapons of all kinds and within every type of range. At relatively low cost, she will be in a position to produce large quantities of such weapons, with fast breeders providing an abundant supply of the plutonium required. Lucky Europe and Luck France - at long last in a position to engage in an enlarged nuclear deterrent of their own, thus guaranteeing their security
+> No, but 1. By staying there you have already agreed to pay [whether you pay or not is a different story], and So the issue is that the United States forcibly naturalized you as a citizen, and didn't offer you the chance to sign a contract the instant you emerged from the womb? You can agree not to pay the US any more taxes, and leave. Just like you can agree not to pay a hotel anything, and leave. Now, how harsh the sun is outside the hotel, the fact that there aren't any nicer hotels in town, etc. is not really any concern of the hotel. It's your choice. > 2. The agency that actually takes your money and gives it back to the hotel is the government. Do you acknowledge that in this country, at least in theory, the government is a democratically elected expression of the will of the people? Compared to, say, a monarchy or a totalitarian state? When 10 people on a desert island form a tribal council, they've formed a government. If one of them dissents and doesn't want to participate, he is free to leave to another part of the island. If he decides to stay and agrees to abide by the council's rules, then isn't it only fair that he holds up his side of the bargain? Again, I bring up the distinction with North Korea, or perhaps a monarchy. Your parents birthed you in the USA, without consulting your preferences. They thrust that unfortunate fate upon you. However, the people of the USA have been so kind as to allow you the option of leaving if you don't like the system we've set up. Under these circumstances, your decision to stay is a voluntary one. No one is forcing you to stay here except your own preferences of convenience, as you've stated above. So in what way is the government's request for you to uphold your end of the citizenship contract any different from a hotel's request that you pay the bill if you choose to stay the night? Yes, I know the word "g-o-v-e-r-n-m-e-n-t" is spelled differently from the word "h-o-t-e-l". I mean other than that. > In other words, because the there isn't a better country, that means we are already the best-possible country and can't get any better. Nope, not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that as you look around the world and look for a better, more equitable, market-friendly environment, you might realize that there aren't actually that many. A, perhaps there are other forces in play, and other reasons for why the world is the way it is. [SEP] nd rather than automatically assuming that all the financiers, economists, politicians, and businessmen of the rest of the world are stupid and fail to see the simple ingenuity of "just letting the market work"
+We invented a system called GPA to determine if they were as, more, or successful at the "mission" (?) as others in learning environments. It has nothing to do with having "decent" grades, it has to do with relative performance. And yes, GPA is not a perfect system. But that doesn't mean that since it's already imperfect we should throw it out the window instead of analyzing what could be done to improve it. You're just saying it's worthless as a justification for other people to get in. I'm not a low intelligence person for having this view. I'm a biological engineering student at an ivy that is internationally renowned for its engineering program. Your points are riddled with fallacy if you think that calling me stupid wins you the argument. I am able to refute and reply, but I really don't see the point if you are so unabashedly willing to start every conversation with the conviction that you can never be wrong. I am wrong, frequently. It's how one learns about everything. If you are unable to see the nuance in things or the fact that there are a million reasons people judge people and systematically maximizing ("reverse racism", which isn't a thing) that through AA and parity movements makes the situation worse, I see no possible reason that you would have any genuine interest in sharing ideas with me, as you can't stop yourself from spouting on about how racist and sexist I am for being analytical. Even worse, you think it justifies your positions by putting words in my mouth. It is possible to disagree on things and not be a gaping cockhole about it. I probably have to bring things down to your level here, so how about this. I dare you to put aside your distaste for my positions and make any genuine inquiry. Double dog dare ya. [SEP] All you gotta do is say, "Okay, I'm listening" in the reply and I'll refute all of your points. Maybe I'll learn something too, and change my view if I come to see your reasoning follows stronger.
+Yes, but my condescension (which was entirely deserved) accompanied a rebuttal. You ignored the rebuttal and focused on the insult, presumably because your point was fairly incontrovertibly disproven. As to the second part... I'm afraid you misunderstand. I said don't ignore the part of my comment which is relevant. I didn't do that. I addressed your point, but also pointed out your silly lack of capitalisation. [SEP] You replied solely to the part of my comment which was irrelevant.
+You are 13! I'm 34 and I will trade you my life for your straight up, car bank account, age, ect. You can fail school and you know what happens? you get to do it all over again. Seriously even if you get kicked out of school you can still find a job, a SO, some place to live, and just have a life in general (a happy one too). Actually, I think your problem is your parents. They have bad habits that cause problems instead of prevent them, they freak out about them, and over the years you have learned to freak out about them mimicking your parents. Your depression and anxiety is a learned behavior when it comes down to it. You could medicate it, but can you medicate a learned behavior? You need to spend time with people that have good habits, and learn that shit. [SEP] Nothing matters when you are 13.
+Democracy is a process, not an event. There's been countless explanations that not going ahead with Brexit is not anti-democratic. For starters, , even if the people want them to. [SEP] an important part of the constitutional law of the UK involves MPs not acting against the interests of the people
+I like the show too, who like to jerk themselves off over how smart they are for understanding a sci-fi cartoon about an alcoholic scientist and his hapless sidekick. There may not be a lot of them, but they're certainly loud enough to make it seem like there are. [SEP] but there's definitely a subset of really obnoxious fans
+That is the only point he presented for why travel will not become much faster. If there were other points maybe he should state them? The original poster said traffic would be worse, the next guy said there shouldn't be a clog, which is correct because if you see how traffic jams actually happen a lot of it is preventable if there was some sort of interconnectivity between cars telling each one how and when to move so that there aren't artificial jams created by someone not picking up speed when they should or slowing down because the guy in front of them wasn't paying attention and stopped suddenly. He said you can't fit every single car on the bridge at once, but that's not the point. The rate of new cars entering and old cars leaving will be substantially increased so overall capacity won't really matter. I don't think either of you understand what it would mean to have self-driving cars. >So if you think traffic is going to be a thing of the past then you are living in fantasy land. I never said that. It's pretty clear you don't really understand the reality we are working towards. If a bridge can only fit 500 cars at a time but those cars are networked and communicating between one another, they will pour out of both ends much faster than they do now, and what we view as "rush hour" will eventually become like regular midday traffic with no comparable "backups". It's like the difference between moving 10 feet every 5 minutes and stopping at a stop sign before you continue on your way. Btw, downvote is not the disagree button. [SEP] Maybe you aren't following the comment chain?
+I know you are going nuts with trying to call me out on stuff, and that is fine, but would you disagree with that? I admit my original post was more blunt, but I did clarify almost everything in the comments. if so, then we have a difference of opinion. [SEP] Would you disagree that for most people in a long term committed relationship that this fetish is unsustainable?
+No worries mate, u "With his career stalled, he took out a £30,000 bank loan,[4] secured by a life insurance policy, to buy his way into the fledgling March team as a Formula Two (F2) driver in 1971. Because of his family's disapproval he had an ongoing feud with them over his racing ambitions and abandoned further contact." http [SEP] gave me a genuine laugh irl.
+Get out of here with your apologist BS. Russia taken taken step after step in recent years to undermine democracy, weaken Western alliances, and encourage neofascist kleptocracy all over the world. They've committed chemical attacks in foreignp nations, assassinated political opponents, invaded and annexed their neighbors, and in a wild turn of events seem to have brought the ruling US political party to it's knees after throwing the election in its favor, perhaps their biggest victory since 1945. [SEP] What about what about whataboutism?
 >There's not thing wrong with vigilanteism if it's used correctly. Good vigilantism is called due process This of course makes all vigilantism incorrect Your personal definition of justice is not what the law is trying to uphold, and thank fuck for that [SEP] Good vigilantism is called due process. This of course makes all vigilantism incorrect
-I for one support your typographical preferences. It is important to bring emphasis to where emphasis is due. DWShimoda always spits the good shit. Dude is among the most woke here. [SEP] I for one support your typographical preferences.
+It is important to bring emphasis to where emphasis is due. DWShimoda always spits the good shit. Dude is among the most woke here. [SEP] I for one support your typographical preferences.
 An appeal to authority is a subset of an appeal to ethics. You're starting to get it, but you overstep by making the assumption that appeals to authority/ethics are inferior. Logic can be distorted by falsities, emotion by insincerity, and ethics by exactly what you described. There is nothing inherently wrong with Americans respecting their constitution, but it has been used for manipulation to their detriment; just as any other tendency among the culture could. [SEP] You're starting to get it
-So wait, Fable - which was a very cute, entertaining if admittedly short adventure - and FEAR - which was very entertaining, genuinely scary shooter with sort of crappy (in my opinion, anyway) multiplayer - are "bad games", but a game where you run around all day grinding experience points, and pay a monthly fee for the "service", is good? You know what I call games like WoW? A job. If you ever get one, you'll understand what I mean. [SEP] You know what I call games like WoW? A job. If you ever get one, you'll understand what I mean.
-Why, she's a woman. You're attacking him by saying the he is too feminine, which is to say being feminen is bad thing to be. Even more you're saying that him being feminine is a disqualifying characteristic for the vice presidency since you wouldn't vote for the ticket with him on it. Last you say you won't vote for the guy because of his comedy and personality. Those are shallow characteristics to base your vote off of, why not vote on policy. It's troubling when Clinton's own supporters are engaging in sexist rhetoric and voting behavior. [SEP] Last you say you won't vote for the guy because of his comedy and personality. Those are shallow characteristics to base your vote off of, why not vote on policy.
-The reasoning for this was explained by a very eloquent discussion on Radio 4 that I heard on the way home today. It's all about the visibility of woman who have made a contribution to British society and, why as public institution the Bank of England has a responsibility to do so. Now, the female lawyer (Caroline Criado-Perez) who campaigned for this was happy with Austin as she was a fan but would have preferred someone who wasn't from popular culture one example and would be my choice is the Dark Lady of DNA. However, as it is summer and, all you boys are here, any sensible conversation about this is unlikely...any of you have daughters? [SEP] However, as it is summer and, all you boys are here, any sensible conversation about this is unlikely...any of you have daughters?
-I actually think Toronto is one of the most accepting cities of the renter mindset in North America other than NYC and SF. On the flipside, many millennials in Toronto somehow feel upset that many people (Gen X'ers) are totally fine in buying a place and "settling down". To each there own. [SEP] On the flipside, many millennials in Toronto somehow feel upset that many people (Gen X'ers) are totally fine in buying a place and "settling down".
-French have a better view of America than Germans, and also have more military cooperation with us. Their people are more mean towards foreigners though and they don't speak as much English. So for me personally to visit or live in, i'd say Germany. But in a way that affects my life, I would say I like France better although I wouldn't want to visit France over Germany. They're just better allies to have. [SEP] Their people are more mean towards foreigners though and they don't speak as much English.
-You are clearly taking that out of context. There is an argument that sexism describes a systemic power dynamic in society at large, i.e., sexism is a system where one gender has a pervasive advantage in most areas of society over others. By that definition, sexism against multiple genders can't exist because you can't have men and women both be systemically disadvantaged in comparison to each other. The implication of this is that an individual act by the oppressed group against the oppressing group does not reinforce that power difference in the same way, and so it is less harmful. This does not mean that individual act is right. Another way to look it is that when you and kinderdmom use the word "sexism", you are talking about different things. If we called overarching disparities in power "foo"s and individual acts that treat people unfairly because of their gender "bar"s, I think you and kindermom would both agree that this app is "bar". kindermom is saying a black person hating a white person is not a "foo", even if it is a "bar". It's also important that Kindermom isn't defending this app, and neither is anyone else you and others have linked to who makes this argument about sexism as a system. No feminist is defending this app. [SEP] Another way to look it is that when you and kinderdmom use the word "sexism", you are talking about different things. If we called overarching disparities in power "foo"s and individual acts that treat people unfairly because of their gender "bar"s, I think you and kindermom would both agree that this app is "bar". kindermom is saying a black person hating a white person is not a "foo", even if it is a "bar".
-Haha, well, if I tried, I think I could create counter arguments to that- not that it really makes any true arguments to start with. I thought it was hilarious though. And I have a completely different set of reasons for that. Here's one I listed before: One is that I believe there is no path to understanding God. Once you accept that there is a God, the fact that we can not reach a similar understanding of him using logic and reason probably means that he doesn't intend to show himself to you. Thus, God has to come to you to understand him, not the other way around. This is not something that most religions believe- in fact, as far as I know, only CERTAIN Christians believe that such is the case. [SEP] One is that I believe there is no path to understanding God.
-Wow. This is a very oversimplistic analysis. I'm surprised to see it get so many upvotes. >If we compare this to hockey, where penalty shot goal conversion is around 30% and a 1-0 score is highly unlikely to stay throughout the game, it's no wonder that players try to stay on their feet instead of flopping down on the ice. First of all, this is comparing apples and oranges. A hockey ring and goal is much much smaller in comparison to a footballfield/goal. It takes less effort to score. Physically much more is allowed. Really, there is no way you can keep a straight face and compare penalties in either sports with eachother. >If a football player who is attacking all alone is entering the penalty area to the far right, close to being out of bounds and is tackled, of course he is going to flop over and dive! You're making it seem as if "entering the penalty area" is the easiest thing in the world. It's the task of defence, not only to prevent goals, but specially to keep attackers from entering the penaltybox. Once an attacker is inside the box, the risk of getting a goal against increases. Instead of "blaming" the concept of penalties, please consider the fact that a defender is already failing by allowing attackers to near his goalarea. I'm not defending flopping or unfair play. But your view is so simplistic and shows your knowledge of the game is limited. And with you a lot of "soccer" fans on Reddit unfortunately. [SEP] Really, there is no way you can keep a straight face and compare penalties in either sports with eachother.
-I will just go ahead and be the first to suggest that she must have an adorable personality, a lovely figure and an all around charming presence about her that is difficult to describe, plus lots of money. Without those, there would apparently be little to recommend her as an acquaintance, much less a mate. "Tape it!." "I am!!" Picture of countryside. Edit: Fuck you all. I stand by it. You don't like my comment because it's about a woman. I would have said the same thing if it had been a man, but no one wants to consider that. [SEP] Fuck you all. I stand by it. You don't like my comment because it's about a woman.
-Germaine Greer is very much mainstream in the UK. She appears on TV quite a lot, or certainly used to. > Trp is a sexual strategy. Feminism is a movement to promote gender equality, yet you keep equating them as if their paths are similar. I think feminism is a sexual strategy, given that it's a strategy to promote the interests of one sex (women) over the other (men). The equality it promotes is superficial and selective, eg. we want 50% of CEOs to be women, but we don't want 50% of garbage collectors to be women. Also, the understanding I get is that feminism thinks that gender is a social construct, that men and women are essentially the same (except physically) and that we should be treated the same. I disagree and think that men and women are equal but different, that we have different needs, desires and motivations, but that we exist on a spectrum of masculine and feminine, with women being more feminine in general, and men being more masculine, but some crossover. This is where the main problem lies with feminism in my opinion. It's not that you have bad intentions. I believe you have good intentions but are misguided. [SEP] This is where the main problem lies with feminism in my opinion. It's not that you have bad intentions. I believe you have good intentions but are misguided.
+So wait, Fable - which was a very cute, entertaining if admittedly short adventure - and FEAR - which was very entertaining, genuinely scary shooter with sort of crappy (in my opinion, anyway) multiplayer - are "bad games", but a game where you run around all day grinding experience points, and pay a monthly fee for the "service", is good? [SEP] You know what I call games like WoW? A job. If you ever get one, you'll understand what I mean.
+Why, she's a woman. You're attacking him by saying the he is too feminine, which is to say being feminen is bad thing to be. Even more you're saying that him being feminine is a disqualifying characteristic for the vice presidency since you wouldn't vote for the ticket with him on it. It's troubling when Clinton's own supporters are engaging in sexist rhetoric and voting behavior. [SEP] Last you say you won't vote for the guy because of his comedy and personality. Those are shallow characteristics to base your vote off of, why not vote on policy.
+The reasoning for this was explained by a very eloquent discussion on Radio 4 that I heard on the way home today. It's all about the visibility of woman who have made a contribution to British society and, why as public institution the Bank of England has a responsibility to do so. Now, the female lawyer (Caroline Criado-Perez) who campaigned for this was happy with Austin as she was a fan but would have preferred someone who wasn't from popular culture one example and would be my choice is the Dark Lady of DNA. [SEP] However, as it is summer and, all you boys are here, any sensible conversation about this is unlikely...any of you have daughters?
+I actually think Toronto is one of the most accepting cities of the renter mindset in North America other than NYC and SF. To each there own. [SEP] On the flipside, many millennials in Toronto somehow feel upset that many people (Gen X'ers) are totally fine in buying a place and "settling down".
+French have a better view of America than Germans, and also have more military cooperation with us. So for me personally to visit or live in, i'd say Germany. But in a way that affects my life, I would say I like France better although I wouldn't want to visit France over Germany. They're just better allies to have. [SEP] Their people are more mean towards foreigners though and they don't speak as much English.
+You are clearly taking that out of context. There is an argument that sexism describes a systemic power dynamic in society at large, i.e., sexism is a system where one gender has a pervasive advantage in most areas of society over others. By that definition, sexism against multiple genders can't exist because you can't have men and women both be systemically disadvantaged in comparison to each other. The implication of this is that an individual act by the oppressed group against the oppressing group does not reinforce that power difference in the same way, and so it is less harmful. This does not mean that individual act is right. It's also important that Kindermom isn't defending this app, and neither is anyone else you and others have linked to who makes this argument about sexism as a system. No feminist is defending this app. [SEP] Another way to look it is that when you and kinderdmom use the word "sexism", you are talking about different things. If we called overarching disparities in power "foo"s and individual acts that treat people unfairly because of their gender "bar"s, I think you and kindermom would both agree that this app is "bar". kindermom is saying a black person hating a white person is not a "foo", even if it is a "bar".
+Haha, well, if I tried, I think I could create counter arguments to that- not that it really makes any true arguments to start with. I thought it was hilarious though. And I have a completely different set of reasons for that. Here's one I listed before: Once you accept that there is a God, the fact that we can not reach a similar understanding of him using logic and reason probably means that he doesn't intend to show himself to you. Thus, God has to come to you to understand him, not the other way around. This is not something that most religions believe- in fact, as far as I know, only CERTAIN Christians believe that such is the case. [SEP] One is that I believe there is no path to understanding God.
+Wow. This is a very oversimplistic analysis. I'm surprised to see it get so many upvotes. >If we compare this to hockey, where penalty shot goal conversion is around 30% and a 1-0 score is highly unlikely to stay throughout the game, it's no wonder that players try to stay on their feet instead of flopping down on the ice. First of all, this is comparing apples and oranges. A hockey ring and goal is much much smaller in comparison to a footballfield/goal. It takes less effort to score. Physically much more is allowed. >If a football player who is attacking all alone is entering the penalty area to the far right, close to being out of bounds and is tackled, of course he is going to flop over and dive! You're making it seem as if "entering the penalty area" is the easiest thing in the world. It's the task of defence, not only to prevent goals, but specially to keep attackers from entering the penaltybox. Once an attacker is inside the box, the risk of getting a goal against increases. Instead of "blaming" the concept of penalties, please consider the fact that a defender is already failing by allowing attackers to near his goalarea. I'm not defending flopping or unfair play. But your view is so simplistic and shows your knowledge of the game is limited. And with you a lot of "soccer" fans on Reddit unfortunately. [SEP] Really, there is no way you can keep a straight face and compare penalties in either sports with eachother.
+I will just go ahead and be the first to suggest that she must have an adorable personality, a lovely figure and an all around charming presence about her that is difficult to describe, plus lots of money. Without those, there would apparently be little to recommend her as an acquaintance, much less a mate. "Tape it!." "I am!!" Picture of countryside. Edit: I would have said the same thing if it had been a man, but no one wants to consider that. [SEP] Fuck you all. I stand by it. You don't like my comment because it's about a woman.
+Germaine Greer is very much mainstream in the UK. She appears on TV quite a lot, or certainly used to. > Trp is a sexual strategy. Feminism is a movement to promote gender equality, yet you keep equating them as if their paths are similar. I think feminism is a sexual strategy, given that it's a strategy to promote the interests of one sex (women) over the other (men). The equality it promotes is superficial and selective, eg. we want 50% of CEOs to be women, but we don't want 50% of garbage collectors to be women. Also, the understanding I get is that feminism thinks that gender is a social construct, that men and women are essentially the same (except physically) and that we should be treated the same. I disagree and think that men and women are equal but different, that we have different needs, desires and motivations, but that we exist on a spectrum of masculine and feminine, with women being more feminine in general, and men being more masculine, but some crossover. [SEP] This is where the main problem lies with feminism in my opinion. It's not that you have bad intentions. I believe you have good intentions but are misguided.
 You need to calm down and realize these people are just trying to explain how a third party thinks. Anti abortionists think that a person is being killed in the process. Women making their own choices is a secondary issue. [SEP] You need to calm down...
-Grown-ups have no excuse for the "welfare creates dependency" myth. How do you remember to breathe while harboring such a fantastically stupid thought? Social spending doesn't break the necks of people with paralyzed bodies. Democratic politicians surely did not cause for more than 1 in 100,000 of the pregnancies that lead to single mother households. If ideology has anything to do with the mental illnesses that render some American unable to work, surely the batshit insane ravings of cutthroat conservatives are much more liable than the reasonable calls for balance from the left. Quit shitting all over this great nation with your mind and start embracing reality. Welfare is a response to a problem, not the cause of it. There are easily 100 cases of real need for each case of fraud and abuse. Do you really want to be the monster who starves dozens of American children just to root out that one guy who took a couple of pennies out of your annual salary without really needing it? [SEP] Welfare is a response to a problem, not the cause of it.
-If you care, you'll read. I summed it up earlier with "they knew it was a sham even then" basically. Said and Leibovitz are extremely important when trying to gain perspective on the situation here beyond the narratives we are fed by current, louder interests. They are also more fun to read and listen to than an imbecile like me. I recommend it. But I'm way beyond your simplistic popular narrative, and frankly no longer into trying to write out and argue my own perspective to such lengths to users. [SEP] I'm way beyond your simplistic popular narrative
-My own grave? Who is burying me? I care not for the downvotes of dipshits, lol. I would, however, love to hear your example of where I failed to comprehend something. Incredulity is not a lack of comprehension. Also, that statement you're so hurt over had nothing to do with an opinion I expressed about the show. It was in reference to them completely failing to understand what the opinion I was expressing was and how to answer it in a contextually appropriate manner, which they had failed to do in multiple posts. Lack of comprehension, indeed. You can't even figure out how to insult me properly because you can't even understand what I'm saying in context, lol. I don't think I've ever seen anyone fail so hard at trying to /r/iamverysmart someone before. You literally just proved that you're not smart enough to understand what I was criticizing them for understanding. Thanks for the laugh, kiddo. [SEP] Also, that statement you're so hurt over had nothing to do with an opinion I expressed about the show. It was in reference to them completely failing to understand what the opinion I was expressing was and how to answer it in a contextually appropriate manner, which they had failed to do in multiple posts.
-When a "rock star" espouses opinions on gun control, THEY are bringing gun control debate into rock. He made the headlines not me. And you may not have noticed that A lot of countries are talking about your issues with guns, not just Britain. [SEP] not just Britain
-I hope not, trophies bore me. If I get them, yay? but I dont bust a gut looking for them. Having said that, I can see the sort of things that would be awarded with trophies; 1) first upgrade to suit/mutli tool/ship 2) first warp to a new system 3) get to the center (minus 50dkp cos you didnt know what the fk to do, sorry) 4) acquire new ship. 5) make x # of units. 6) combine x and y elements to make a new one. fairly obvious and brain numbing stuff really. Dont play for trophies, play for fun. If I could find a way to turn off all trophies for all games, trust me I would. [SEP] Dont play for trophies, play for fun.
-Your husband sounds like a total child. You sound like you'd like to be a good wife in a mature relationship, but honestly this doesn't sound like the guy. I can't believe he would argue about space in the fridge. That's something you do with a roommate when you aren't even good at being roommates with each other. I think you should feel free to go to the hotel today, but you should drop this "really wanting to make the marriage work" thing because that takes two people. You can't make this work on your own without being a miserable slave. [SEP] but honestly this doesn't sound like the guy.
-No, not really. If you actually read the lore in WoW (hard for some of you to do, I know), we can't go around killing off Old Gods, as this has adverse affects on Azeroth. As far as the Titans go, we haven't killed off any of them either, just some of the Watchers (and I think just Loken, at that). Stories grow, and change. I don't see the big deal about killing off major characters. What makes them so sacred that they can only be killed off in an RTS version of the game, and not an MMO version? [SEP] (hard for some of you to do, I know)
->Arguing with... yeh but ur not arguing my point, ur acting like ur educating me, as if the fact that im wrong is a forgone conclusion that you can illuminate by telling me stuff >There are people who... its irrelevant because as I just pointed out, its wrong to look at anarchism and feminism as movements in the same sense of the word. A liberal feminist is a feminist in the same way that a terf is a feminist and an anarcha-feminist is and some other stuff im sure [SEP] yeh but ur not arguing my point, ur acting like ur educating me, as if the fact that im wrong is a forgone conclusion that you can illuminate by telling me stuff
+Grown-ups have no excuse for the "welfare creates dependency" myth. How do you remember to breathe while harboring such a fantastically stupid thought? Social spending doesn't break the necks of people with paralyzed bodies. Democratic politicians surely did not cause for more than 1 in 100,000 of the pregnancies that lead to single mother households. If ideology has anything to do with the mental illnesses that render some American unable to work, surely the batshit insane ravings of cutthroat conservatives are much more liable than the reasonable calls for balance from the left. Quit shitting all over this great nation with your mind and start embracing reality. There are easily 100 cases of real need for each case of fraud and abuse. Do you really want to be the monster who starves dozens of American children just to root out that one guy who took a couple of pennies out of your annual salary without really needing it? [SEP] Welfare is a response to a problem, not the cause of it.
+If you care, you'll read. I summed it up earlier with "they knew it was a sham even then" basically. Said and Leibovitz are extremely important when trying to gain perspective on the situation here beyond the narratives we are fed by current, louder interests. They are also more fun to read and listen to than an imbecile like me. I recommend it. But , and frankly no longer into trying to write out and argue my own perspective to such lengths to users. [SEP] I'm way beyond your simplistic popular narrative
+My own grave? Who is burying me? I care not for the downvotes of dipshits, lol. I would, however, love to hear your example of where I failed to comprehend something. Incredulity is not a lack of comprehension. Lack of comprehension, indeed. You can't even figure out how to insult me properly because you can't even understand what I'm saying in context, lol. I don't think I've ever seen anyone fail so hard at trying to /r/iamverysmart someone before. You literally just proved that you're not smart enough to understand what I was criticizing them for understanding. Thanks for the laugh, kiddo. [SEP] Also, that statement you're so hurt over had nothing to do with an opinion I expressed about the show. It was in reference to them completely failing to understand what the opinion I was expressing was and how to answer it in a contextually appropriate manner, which they had failed to do in multiple posts.
+When a "rock star" espouses opinions on gun control, THEY are bringing gun control debate into rock. He made the headlines not me. And you may not have noticed that A lot of countries are talking about your issues with guns, . [SEP] not just Britain
+I hope not, trophies bore me. If I get them, yay? but I dont bust a gut looking for them. Having said that, I can see the sort of things that would be awarded with trophies; 1) first upgrade to suit/mutli tool/ship 2) first warp to a new system 3) get to the center (minus 50dkp cos you didnt know what the fk to do, sorry) 4) acquire new ship. 5) make x # of units. 6) combine x and y elements to make a new one. fairly obvious and brain numbing stuff really. If I could find a way to turn off all trophies for all games, trust me I would. [SEP] Dont play for trophies, play for fun.
+Your husband sounds like a total child. You sound like you'd like to be a good wife in a mature relationship, I can't believe he would argue about space in the fridge. That's something you do with a roommate when you aren't even good at being roommates with each other. I think you should feel free to go to the hotel today, but you should drop this "really wanting to make the marriage work" thing because that takes two people. You can't make this work on your own without being a miserable slave. [SEP] but honestly this doesn't sound like the guy.
+No, not really. If you actually read the lore in WoW , we can't go around killing off Old Gods, as this has adverse affects on Azeroth. As far as the Titans go, we haven't killed off any of them either, just some of the Watchers (and I think just Loken, at that). Stories grow, and change. I don't see the big deal about killing off major characters. What makes them so sacred that they can only be killed off in an RTS version of the game, and not an MMO version? [SEP] (hard for some of you to do, I know)
+>Arguing with... >There are people who... its irrelevant because as I just pointed out, its wrong to look at anarchism and feminism as movements in the same sense of the word. A liberal feminist is a feminist in the same way that a terf is a feminist and an anarcha-feminist is and some other stuff im sure [SEP] yeh but ur not arguing my point, ur acting like ur educating me, as if the fact that im wrong is a forgone conclusion that you can illuminate by telling me stuff
 > You're very presumptuous for someone who doesn't know what they're talking about. It's really annoying that you use this kind of rhetoric, because I'm giving you the revolutionary black nationalist and marxist feminist views of these issues, while you're offering the standard liberal approach that I hear every single day. If you consider yourself an anarchist, you should really read the anarchist literature on the subject. This is what I mean when I call your point of view "capitalist". I'm not saying you're a right-libertarian, I'm saying you're resorting to the default liberalism, the hegemonic bourgeois view, which befalls on everyone through the media and all the rest of it. The only antidote to this is to actually study the sociology of race and gender. > You can't redefine racism to be only 'violent, systematic oppression'. If a white person gets a job ahead of a black person because the employer is racist, is that not racism? I could summon hundreds of other examples. I don't mean violence in the immediate sense of genocide or slavery, but in the sense of structural violence, in the sense that it doesn't allow people to meet their basic needs. A black person not getting a job because a white person got it is structural violence, racist structural violence. A white person not getting a job because a black person got it isn't. Here's some useful resources for black liberation. This book is a favorite of mine as well. Here's a similar collection of leftist works on feminism. I really hope you're interested in studying these issues more. Especially because anarchism is currently very detached from people of color and women, and this has been one of its biggest setbacks, as shown in After Winter Must Come Spring. [SEP] It's really annoying that you use this kind of rhetoric, ... while you're offering the standard liberal approach that I hear every single day. If you consider yourself an anarchist, you should really read the anarchist literature on the subject.
-First off, I wasn't beinf hostile, just trying to prove a point. What you are implying is that I'm a teenager with no occupation and somehow this makes my argument any less valid. I too am a man with a full-time job. That's no excuse to have THAT much mastery points with that tier elo. The "I would have been higher elo if i had grinded" js a bullshit excuse. And for how many games you played and your elo, 60 wr is pretty shitty. If you are already hitting 60 wr at gold that means for your skill level right now you hit your ceiling. I posted one of my builds in this same thread, go look at my reasoning for it but i will post the build again for you. (Tiger) Talisman+Refil --> Tiamat --> Chilling Smite --> Boots of choice (Swifties, Merc, or Tabi)--> Raptor Cloak (or Sheen, if you are ahead) --> Finish Cinderhulk --> Frozen Gauntlet (and Raptors if you bought sheen instead earlier) --> Spirit's Visage --> Finish Titanic's (or Finish Zz'rot if your lanes are pushed in and your team doesnt have reliable wave clear/ Finish Ohmwrecker if ahead and have a towerdive team comp) --> Finish Zz'Rot (or Titanic's, if you build Zz'Rot already) This build is unarguably (in termsof pure stat) the most well-rounded build Udyr can have. By the time you get a point in Phoenix, you should have finished Titanic's. this makes your wave clear better than Kayle or Ziggs. This build Maximizes the amount of MR and Armor without sacrificing damage by lettinf Titanic's do all the Damage scaling for you. Udyr's biggest threat is map presence and versatility. Getting items and Towers >>> Kills and teamfights in most cases. Gank ONLY when kill is guaranteed or when you have to countergank. Always try to be at least 10 jungle creeps ahead of enemy Jungler. Alternate builds for enemy team having no Insta burst/infinite CC chain and /or your team lacks AP damage= (Phoenix) Talisman+Refil pot --> Chilling Smite --> T1 Boots --> Finish Echo --> T2 Boots --> Build Abyssal Sceptre --> Lich Bane --> Thornmail --> Deadman's /Zz'Rot (Zz'Rot if behind, Deadman if ahead) This build, unlike the Tiger build, goes for early damage. instead of Triforce you get Lich Bane, which doesn't fall off late game and absolutely destroys towers even in late game and still deals decent damage to non-tanks. You can get an early lead from the strong Phoenix proc and become a tanky god throughout the game. This build actually does fall off extreme late game when everyone have already finished their build and have elixirs, but if you haven't won already with this build you messed up somewhere big time. There's literally more than a dozen builds Udyr is viable with. The point is you have to find the one that's strongest in YOUR game at the moment. If you think Triforce is a must on Udyr no matter what you already aren't maximizing the benefit that Udyr's versatility offers you. [SEP] First off, I wasn't beinf hostile, just trying to prove a point.
-Ok then, enlighten me on a game that your far superior mind can understand has good physics then? Personally I think Gta V has really good driving physics seing as they're easy to understand, fun spaz out just enough to be able to give a fun gameplay. Not 100 % realistic, because that shit would not be fun at all, but realistic enough to not feel strange to play. [SEP] Ok then, enlighten me on a game that your far superior mind can understand has good physics then?
-He grabbed his neck. That is it. Of the tings you mentioned, the only objective factor you mentioned about rl is him being controversial. And that is because drama whores takes anything he says as ammunition against him. Even when he just expresses an opinion, which he should be able to do. The 12 year old argument there really aren't any basis for. I also disagree about your argument. People getting hired in esports based on hidden things they are doing, of course that is bad. But do you have proof of any reason why rl should not be hired other than saying things that are considered controversial? People doing hidden things is of course bad, because the people hiring doesn't know about it. But if someone is getting hired over and over again, despite everything they do being out in the spotlight, then you may have to look at yourself. [SEP] Even when he just expresses an opinion, which he should be able to do.
->Why do you keep repeating this line? I have already showed how it was relevant, by the way you responded to it. Why did you stop asking your 'questions', if it wasn't relevant? Why wont you answer that? I've already explained that something isn't relevant simply because it's replied to. Why would stop asking questions make it relevant? >Funny how your 'questions' stopped when i made a clarification. Why is that? You mean when you answered my questions. Why would I keep asking for clarification for something that I've already gotten? >What was wrong with my reasoning? What did you find amusing about my reasoning? Saying that a group believes something, especially when it comes to minorities, is an amusing way of reasoning. You later clarified that's not what you meant, and then started talking about me being too hung up on semantics, as if I believed that you weren't dumb enough to generalise like that. Your original premise (even if you had meant what you said) was amusing, and your response to pointing out what you said was also amusing. >I guess you don't really understand... you copied my line. What intent do i have to guess about? I dont really care what your intent was... you copied my line, and used it in conversation. It seems that you're unable to follow the conversation, which doesn't really surprise me. You said that I repeated what you said in an attempt to sound clever, and because I thought you were clever to say it. That has to do directly with my intent: "This is the part where you feign ignorance and repeat what i say, in an attempt to sound clever... because you thought it sounded clever when i said it." I'm glad to see that it only took you 10 replies to begin to understand this. Maybe there is hope for you yet? >Srsly bro... what is this... like 3 times? Let me help you a little because i'm starting to feel bad for you. Saying that my opinion doesn't impact your opinion, lacks substance. It's like saying 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me'. What does that have to do with what I said? >Whoops! Now you are starting to get tripped up while you try and keep your story straight. How could my first statement not be relevant? Lol... that is literally nonsense. You make a lot of claims, but I think that I've yet to see you substantiate one. That your first reply to me was irrelevant is what I've been saying all along, so how am I getting tripped up over anything? Do you mean that you've been unable to follow the conversation? Because that would explain a lot. >And why did you repeat what i said? Of course it wasn't semantically/factually/technically (whatever you want to say) correct... but that doesn't mean that in the context, it wasn't acceptable and understandable. This is again assuming that I'd give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to your intelligence. This would have been easier to do if your reply was actually relevant to mine, which I've stated in almost all of my replies to you now, but it wasn't. You're not president Obama. This is not "a normal conversation", and I do not know you. By the way, I didn't repeat what you said. There's a difference between semantically correct and factually correct. >because everyone else realized that i wasn't literally speaking for every 'black' person on the planet. That's why all your replies at the top were downvoted, right? If you're going to use an argumentum ad populum fallacy as your argument then at the very least make sure that the people actually agree with you. Your first replies are at -1 as I'm writing this, and they have been since this begun. I've neither upvoted nor downvoted you. >I mean... we both know that you also realized that... You flatter yourself if you think that I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you know what you were talking about. I was apparently right not to. >Nobody really likes people that do that kind of stuff Especially not black people, right? [SEP] You flatter yourself if you think that I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you know what you were talking about.
-Yes, there's a lot of that. I can't tell you how many times I got "Why are you still single?" or "Aww, you aren't dating anyone?" [SEP] "Aww, you aren't dating anyone?"
-I rephrased below. The politicians you support are generally very anti gun. [SEP] The politicians you support are generally very anti gun.
-I can't believe you were upmodded. http Disclaimer In case you didn't get it, none of the stories are real. It's all fake. We made it all up. It's satire. The people might be real but the quotes are not. If it gets you mad, get a life.(see first amendment) Some definitions of satire witty language used to convey insults or scorn; "he used sarcasm to upset his opponent"; "irony is wasted on the stupid"; "Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own"--Johathan Swift A literary work which exposes and ridicules human vices or folly. Historically perceived as tending toward didacticism, it is usually intended as a moral criticism directed against the injustice of social wrongs. It may be written with witty jocularity or with anger and bitterness. Sidelight: Satiric poets often utilize irony, hyperbole, understatement, and paradox, as in Pope's An Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot . (See also Burlesque, Goliardic Poetry, Hudibrastic Verse, Lampoon, Mock Epic, Parody, Pasquinade) (Compare Antiphrasis) the use of ridicule or scorn, often in a humorous or witty way, to expose vices and follies A mode of writing which exposes the failings of individuals, societies or institutions to ridicule and scorn. Its tone varies from tolerant amusement to bitter indignation (as in Sassoon's war poetry). V An amusing exposure of folly and vice, which aims to produce moral reform. a work of art, literature or music that mocks or ridicules a popular idea or public figure by reduction to absurdity. A work that blends a critical attitude with humor and wit as well as with the intention of improving human institutions or humanity. Unconfirmed Sources political satire and news story parodies as represented above are written as satire or parody. They are, of course, fictitious. [SEP] I can't believe you were upmodded.
-Yes, but due to the higher altitude, it can prevent the premature detonation. Apparently, I haven't tested it. [SEP] Apparently, I haven't tested it
->While that may be an element of some instances of sexual misconduct I dont believe thats where it stems from. Obviously, I disagree. >lack of boundaries, entitlement, overinflated ego.... Lack of boundaries? What a great euphemism for sexual misconduct. It wasn't about sexual gratification, it was about him just lacking boundaries. Are you serious? Entitlement? I mean, that borders so close to my idea of "presuming attraction", that I am going to have to ask why you so fervently rejected my reasoning and then provided one that is almost the same and really too general to serve as a decent explanation anyway. Overinflated ego? Same as above. Guys with big egos think they are the shit. They think they are hot, they think all women want them. That's essentially the same thing I'm saying, even if you don't want it to be. >abuse of power could be argued as the root cause(s). Abuse of power is an action that is taken. You are arguing that the root cause of an action is the action itself? If you ever go into the sciences, you will learn that there really is no such thing as a "root cause" anyway. I would argue that presumption of attraction was a principal factor in all of these cases -- not a root cause. >Presumption of Sexual attraction can lead to a feeling of entitlement, but other factors could also lead there too without it. You forgot the part where you give examples of these other factors....I'm not seeing it. >inflated his ego to the point where he believed he could get away with his misconduct But people don't do everything that they think they can get away with. Are you really going to completely ignore the sexual nature of his actions? Did you miss the part where he masturbated? This is an act of sexual gratification. He had a choice. He could have just interacted with these women the same way that everyone else does and went and jerked off at home, but he didn't. He chose to do something that would give him more pleasure and disregard how the other person felt about it. Anyway, you really took my jokey aside off-topic. The point is that no one should presume anything without a preponderance of evidence. Don't presume innocence, don't presume guilt, don't presume attraction, don't presume repulsion. Presuming anything as a matter of course leads to all sorts of problems, because when you presume something, you are probably wrong. [SEP] If you ever go into the sciences, you will learn that there really is no such thing as a "root cause" anyway.
-His "Why You Should Subscribe" Video: http If some of the comments he makes regarding WoW and CoD don't come across as egotistical, I don't know what does. This vid also seemed unwarranted and made me lose a bit more respect from him: http I tend to appreciate people who are more humble but can still maintain good quality, insightful vids. He has the quality and content down, I just wish he would tone down the pretentiousness. I watched his live stream for a bit during the alpha and couldn't get over his complaining and whining when he was playing the PvP. I went in thinking he was great but came out a bit underwhelmed at his skills regarding map awareness and shooting accuracy. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he didn't get much sleep, which he tends to remind people in his vids, but get some sleep my man! Come back in a better mood. This is all just criticism and I will probably get downvoted for it, but I want to be honest and I want to get back into watching his content without having this thought in the back of my head that just reminds me he isn't as special as he thinks he is. These are just my opinions and everyone is entitled to one. You were just curious of what other people thought. This is my opinion. [SEP] This vid also seemed unwarranted and made me lose a bit more respect from him: http
-I don't like Clarence Thomas' political and legal opinions one bit. The guy is a complete paleo-conservative. Having met him and his family IRL I can't say anything bad about him on that level, but at this point I think it's a billion times more probably that his beliefs come from more of your standard "fucking Liberals REEEEEEEEEEEE" side of things that much of the GOP spawns from. And after his confirmation hearing it's pretty understandable. Frankly, the term people should be using when referring to your Ben Carsons is "useful idiot." You don't strip agency away from the person but instead are placing the blame on the organization. [SEP] And after his confirmation hearing it's pretty understandable.
-This is not entirely correct. Hypothetical case: If your computer is part of a botnet because of a windows vulnerability, microsoft should fix this and push an update. Your stubborness on not updating is keeping the botnet alive. And it's your fault, because microsoft has already fixed the problem. [SEP] Your stubborness on not updating is keeping the botnet alive. And it's your fault, because microsoft has already fixed the problem.
-We're comparing openers vs finishers. Openers have the chance to bat all day, finishers/ tail ender's don't. Also, can you fuck off with the downvotes and the condescension [SEP] Also, can you fuck off with the downvotes and the condescension
-Undertale - game you could do on an Atari ST. Super Meat Boy - 2D game originally done in flash Fez - written in XNA Game Studio Braid - 2D game Ori and the Blind Forest - 2D game written in Unity Yes, they're all very successful, very well done games. They are not, however, Call of Duty, Halo, Sunset Overdrive or any number of other games which rely a lot more on CPU than the GPU. You could run the games you've described quite happily on a low-end laptop with Intel integrated graphics. There's nothing wrong with that - but you're really not making an apples to apples comparison here. [SEP] There's nothing wrong with that - but you're really not making an apples to apples comparison here.
-he doesn't have to nor should he. if you take what 2gb says seriously, then you're a fucking idiot. he jokes more than anyone in the scene. sure he could apologize, if there was malicious intent. but there wasn't. again, it's a joke, if you the subject of the joke or people that hear it can't understand that, then it's not the fault of the person talking. being tasteless and juvenile have no relevance in the argument of speech. i'm not going to get in to a debate because this is not the sub for this type of thing. it's for sc2 and witch-hunting, which i'm sure you're very much a part of. [SEP] it's for sc2 and witch-hunting, which i'm sure you're very much a part of.
-Blue is insipid and sweet and too simple. It's pretty pedestrian for scotch. If it was $20-30 a bottle, it'd be about right. If you want to pay a lot and get good scotch, try the older Macallans. Unfortunately they've gotten super-expensive lately, so the 18-year is in the Blue's neighborhood, now. A few years ago when Blue was uber-popular you could get Macallan 30 for the same price. People figured it out, though... Alberlour is way cheaper and also pretty nice, and in the same flavor range. Scotch is one of those things were price and flavor are almost totally uncorrelated. This looks like a good list of flavor profiles and the brands that match them. Total Wine's website is good for sorting by rating (and they use Wine Enthusiast's ratings, not some in-house BS) and checking prices. [SEP] Blue is insipid and sweet and too simple. It's pretty pedestrian for scotch.
-> that doesn't work for a majority of its players? The fuck are you talking about? It works for the vast, vast vast majority of people. There are 180 Thousand people playing right now, peak was at 210 thousand today. There is a small number of people who have issues. And instead of shutting the fuck up and directing their feedback properly, they went here and started yelling like idiots, and all the other idiots who infest this sub just propell their bullshit. The game fucking works. Some people have issues, yes, welcome to a launch of a game from a small indie company that created their own engine for said game. its normal, its expected. Dont want that to happen to you? Dont fucking play on launch day. Welcome to gaming. Get a clue. [SEP] instead of shutting the fuck up and directing their feedback properly, they went here and started yelling like idiots, and all the other idiots who infest this sub just propell their bullshit.
-This was not a thread for you to run around approving and disapproving of people's positions like some kind of surprise schoolmaster. Not only did I not ask you, but you didn't resolve the Earth's age at all, so the 'we' is unfounded. You also gave a link to Wikipedia, as if I've never heard anyone's position on the age of the Earth in my life, showing your ability to read as though I am a human being and not some character in your mind is pretty poor. And worst of all, you seem completely oblivious to the fact that you and those who "resolved" the age of the Earth could be completely and utterly wrong for reasons currently unknown, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to anything--other than making your attitude about it entirely inexcusable. People who work in fields that actually pertain to this kind of thing are aware of how much estimation and extrapolation goes into it. [SEP] This was not a thread for you to run around approving and disapproving of people's positions like some kind of surprise schoolmaster.
-Blah blah meta game blah blah. I have still yet to have a precise definition of what this "lack if meta game" people keep referring to actually is. A meta game is how people generally play the game. The Planetside 2 meta game involves everyone playing heavy assault and driving a Sunderer with AMS up to a base and just trying to out-pew pew the defenders. This will probably change once we have actual MLG events in battle islands and the nexus and outfits begin to see just how effective alternative methods are to take bases, such as gal drops, squad beacons, squad deploys, and having more combat medics than heavy assaults. It's just like how people watched Starcraft 2 matches and tried to emulate whatever IdrA, Boxer, etc. did in their matches. This issue of needing continent lattices and crap is just fluff. It's not going to make the game "fun" or purposeful. It's going to be another excuse for people to justify ghost capping dead continents at 3am. The reason the game is boring to people is because most people don't know how to engage in good fights and try to dump 48 man platoons on 12v12 fights and then wonder why all the action goes away. The only "action" they can find are critical mass biolab fights where people don't render 3 feet in front of them. [SEP] Blah blah meta game blah blah.
-Did you read OP? Obviously Hog and Bastion are entirely self heal. Moira’s heal stat includes both. I want them separated out so Moira mains don’t have a misunderstanding as to how much team heal vs self heal they are doing. [SEP] Did you read OP?
+What you are implying is that I'm a teenager with no occupation and somehow this makes my argument any less valid. I too am a man with a full-time job. That's no excuse to have THAT much mastery points with that tier elo. The "I would have been higher elo if i had grinded" js a bullshit excuse. And for how many games you played and your elo, 60 wr is pretty shitty. If you are already hitting 60 wr at gold that means for your skill level right now you hit your ceiling. I posted one of my builds in this same thread, go look at my reasoning for it but i will post the build again for you. (Tiger) Talisman+Refil --> Tiamat --> Chilling Smite --> Boots of choice (Swifties, Merc, or Tabi)--> Raptor Cloak (or Sheen, if you are ahead) --> Finish Cinderhulk --> Frozen Gauntlet (and Raptors if you bought sheen instead earlier) --> Spirit's Visage --> Finish Titanic's (or Finish Zz'rot if your lanes are pushed in and your team doesnt have reliable wave clear/ Finish Ohmwrecker if ahead and have a towerdive team comp) --> Finish Zz'Rot (or Titanic's, if you build Zz'Rot already) This build is unarguably (in termsof pure stat) the most well-rounded build Udyr can have. By the time you get a point in Phoenix, you should have finished Titanic's. this makes your wave clear better than Kayle or Ziggs. This build Maximizes the amount of MR and Armor without sacrificing damage by lettinf Titanic's do all the Damage scaling for you. Udyr's biggest threat is map presence and versatility. Getting items and Towers >>> Kills and teamfights in most cases. Gank ONLY when kill is guaranteed or when you have to countergank. Always try to be at least 10 jungle creeps ahead of enemy Jungler. Alternate builds for enemy team having no Insta burst/infinite CC chain and /or your team lacks AP damage= (Phoenix) Talisman+Refil pot --> Chilling Smite --> T1 Boots --> Finish Echo --> T2 Boots --> Build Abyssal Sceptre --> Lich Bane --> Thornmail --> Deadman's /Zz'Rot (Zz'Rot if behind, Deadman if ahead) This build, unlike the Tiger build, goes for early damage. instead of Triforce you get Lich Bane, which doesn't fall off late game and absolutely destroys towers even in late game and still deals decent damage to non-tanks. You can get an early lead from the strong Phoenix proc and become a tanky god throughout the game. This build actually does fall off extreme late game when everyone have already finished their build and have elixirs, but if you haven't won already with this build you messed up somewhere big time. There's literally more than a dozen builds Udyr is viable with. The point is you have to find the one that's strongest in YOUR game at the moment. If you think Triforce is a must on Udyr no matter what you already aren't maximizing the benefit that Udyr's versatility offers you. [SEP] First off, I wasn't beinf hostile, just trying to prove a point.
+Personally I think Gta V has really good driving physics seing as they're easy to understand, fun spaz out just enough to be able to give a fun gameplay. Not 100 % realistic, because that shit would not be fun at all, but realistic enough to not feel strange to play. [SEP] Ok then, enlighten me on a game that your far superior mind can understand has good physics then?
+He grabbed his neck. That is it. Of the tings you mentioned, the only objective factor you mentioned about rl is him being controversial. And that is because drama whores takes anything he says as ammunition against him. The 12 year old argument there really aren't any basis for. I also disagree about your argument. People getting hired in esports based on hidden things they are doing, of course that is bad. But do you have proof of any reason why rl should not be hired other than saying things that are considered controversial? People doing hidden things is of course bad, because the people hiring doesn't know about it. But if someone is getting hired over and over again, despite everything they do being out in the spotlight, then you may have to look at yourself. [SEP] Even when he just expresses an opinion, which he should be able to do.
+>Why do you keep repeating this line? I have already showed how it was relevant, by the way you responded to it. Why did you stop asking your 'questions', if it wasn't relevant? Why wont you answer that? I've already explained that something isn't relevant simply because it's replied to. Why would stop asking questions make it relevant? >Funny how your 'questions' stopped when i made a clarification. Why is that? You mean when you answered my questions. Why would I keep asking for clarification for something that I've already gotten? >What was wrong with my reasoning? What did you find amusing about my reasoning? Saying that a group believes something, especially when it comes to minorities, is an amusing way of reasoning. You later clarified that's not what you meant, and then started talking about me being too hung up on semantics, as if I believed that you weren't dumb enough to generalise like that. Your original premise (even if you had meant what you said) was amusing, and your response to pointing out what you said was also amusing. >I guess you don't really understand... you copied my line. What intent do i have to guess about? I dont really care what your intent was... you copied my line, and used it in conversation. It seems that you're unable to follow the conversation, which doesn't really surprise me. You said that I repeated what you said in an attempt to sound clever, and because I thought you were clever to say it. That has to do directly with my intent: "This is the part where you feign ignorance and repeat what i say, in an attempt to sound clever... because you thought it sounded clever when i said it." I'm glad to see that it only took you 10 replies to begin to understand this. Maybe there is hope for you yet? >Srsly bro... what is this... like 3 times? Let me help you a little because i'm starting to feel bad for you. Saying that my opinion doesn't impact your opinion, lacks substance. It's like saying 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me'. What does that have to do with what I said? >Whoops! Now you are starting to get tripped up while you try and keep your story straight. How could my first statement not be relevant? Lol... that is literally nonsense. You make a lot of claims, but I think that I've yet to see you substantiate one. That your first reply to me was irrelevant is what I've been saying all along, so how am I getting tripped up over anything? Do you mean that you've been unable to follow the conversation? Because that would explain a lot. >And why did you repeat what i said? Of course it wasn't semantically/factually/technically (whatever you want to say) correct... but that doesn't mean that in the context, it wasn't acceptable and understandable. This is again assuming that I'd give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to your intelligence. This would have been easier to do if your reply was actually relevant to mine, which I've stated in almost all of my replies to you now, but it wasn't. You're not president Obama. This is not "a normal conversation", and I do not know you. By the way, I didn't repeat what you said. There's a difference between semantically correct and factually correct. >because everyone else realized that i wasn't literally speaking for every 'black' person on the planet. That's why all your replies at the top were downvoted, right? If you're going to use an argumentum ad populum fallacy as your argument then at the very least make sure that the people actually agree with you. Your first replies are at -1 as I'm writing this, and they have been since this begun. I've neither upvoted nor downvoted you. >I mean... we both know that you also realized that... I was apparently right not to. >Nobody really likes people that do that kind of stuff Especially not black people, right? [SEP] You flatter yourself if you think that I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you know what you were talking about.
+Yes, there's a lot of that. I can't tell you how many times I got "Why are you still single?" or [SEP] "Aww, you aren't dating anyone?"
+I rephrased below. [SEP] The politicians you support are generally very anti gun.
+http Disclaimer In case you didn't get it, none of the stories are real. It's all fake. We made it all up. It's satire. The people might be real but the quotes are not. If it gets you mad, get a life.(see first amendment) Some definitions of satire witty language used to convey insults or scorn; "he used sarcasm to upset his opponent"; "irony is wasted on the stupid"; "Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own"--Johathan Swift A literary work which exposes and ridicules human vices or folly. Historically perceived as tending toward didacticism, it is usually intended as a moral criticism directed against the injustice of social wrongs. It may be written with witty jocularity or with anger and bitterness. Sidelight: Satiric poets often utilize irony, hyperbole, understatement, and paradox, as in Pope's An Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot . (See also Burlesque, Goliardic Poetry, Hudibrastic Verse, Lampoon, Mock Epic, Parody, Pasquinade) (Compare Antiphrasis) the use of ridicule or scorn, often in a humorous or witty way, to expose vices and follies A mode of writing which exposes the failings of individuals, societies or institutions to ridicule and scorn. Its tone varies from tolerant amusement to bitter indignation (as in Sassoon's war poetry). V An amusing exposure of folly and vice, which aims to produce moral reform. a work of art, literature or music that mocks or ridicules a popular idea or public figure by reduction to absurdity. A work that blends a critical attitude with humor and wit as well as with the intention of improving human institutions or humanity. Unconfirmed Sources political satire and news story parodies as represented above are written as satire or parody. They are, of course, fictitious. [SEP] I can't believe you were upmodded.
+Yes, but due to the higher altitude, it can prevent the premature detonation. . [SEP] Apparently, I haven't tested it
+>While that may be an element of some instances of sexual misconduct I dont believe thats where it stems from. Obviously, I disagree. >lack of boundaries, entitlement, overinflated ego.... Lack of boundaries? What a great euphemism for sexual misconduct. It wasn't about sexual gratification, it was about him just lacking boundaries. Are you serious? Entitlement? I mean, that borders so close to my idea of "presuming attraction", that I am going to have to ask why you so fervently rejected my reasoning and then provided one that is almost the same and really too general to serve as a decent explanation anyway. Overinflated ego? Same as above. Guys with big egos think they are the shit. They think they are hot, they think all women want them. That's essentially the same thing I'm saying, even if you don't want it to be. >abuse of power could be argued as the root cause(s). Abuse of power is an action that is taken. You are arguing that the root cause of an action is the action itself? I would argue that presumption of attraction was a principal factor in all of these cases -- not a root cause. >Presumption of Sexual attraction can lead to a feeling of entitlement, but other factors could also lead there too without it. You forgot the part where you give examples of these other factors....I'm not seeing it. >inflated his ego to the point where he believed he could get away with his misconduct But people don't do everything that they think they can get away with. Are you really going to completely ignore the sexual nature of his actions? Did you miss the part where he masturbated? This is an act of sexual gratification. He had a choice. He could have just interacted with these women the same way that everyone else does and went and jerked off at home, but he didn't. He chose to do something that would give him more pleasure and disregard how the other person felt about it. Anyway, you really took my jokey aside off-topic. The point is that no one should presume anything without a preponderance of evidence. Don't presume innocence, don't presume guilt, don't presume attraction, don't presume repulsion. Presuming anything as a matter of course leads to all sorts of problems, because when you presume something, you are probably wrong. [SEP] If you ever go into the sciences, you will learn that there really is no such thing as a "root cause" anyway.
+His "Why You Should Subscribe" Video: http If some of the comments he makes regarding WoW and CoD don't come across as egotistical, I don't know what does. I tend to appreciate people who are more humble but can still maintain good quality, insightful vids. He has the quality and content down, I just wish he would tone down the pretentiousness. I watched his live stream for a bit during the alpha and couldn't get over his complaining and whining when he was playing the PvP. I went in thinking he was great but came out a bit underwhelmed at his skills regarding map awareness and shooting accuracy. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he didn't get much sleep, which he tends to remind people in his vids, but get some sleep my man! Come back in a better mood. This is all just criticism and I will probably get downvoted for it, but I want to be honest and I want to get back into watching his content without having this thought in the back of my head that just reminds me he isn't as special as he thinks he is. These are just my opinions and everyone is entitled to one. You were just curious of what other people thought. This is my opinion. [SEP] This vid also seemed unwarranted and made me lose a bit more respect from him: http
+I don't like Clarence Thomas' political and legal opinions one bit. The guy is a complete paleo-conservative. Having met him and his family IRL I can't say anything bad about him on that level, but at this point I think it's a billion times more probably that his beliefs come from more of your standard "fucking Liberals REEEEEEEEEEEE" side of things that much of the GOP spawns from. Frankly, the term people should be using when referring to your Ben Carsons is "useful idiot." You don't strip agency away from the person but instead are placing the blame on the organization. [SEP] And after his confirmation hearing it's pretty understandable.
+This is not entirely correct. Hypothetical case: If your computer is part of a botnet because of a windows vulnerability, microsoft should fix this and push an update. [SEP] Your stubborness on not updating is keeping the botnet alive. And it's your fault, because microsoft has already fixed the problem.
+We're comparing openers vs finishers. Openers have the chance to bat all day, finishers/ tail ender's don't. [SEP] Also, can you fuck off with the downvotes and the condescension
+Undertale - game you could do on an Atari ST. Super Meat Boy - 2D game originally done in flash Fez - written in XNA Game Studio Braid - 2D game Ori and the Blind Forest - 2D game written in Unity Yes, they're all very successful, very well done games. They are not, however, Call of Duty, Halo, Sunset Overdrive or any number of other games which rely a lot more on CPU than the GPU. You could run the games you've described quite happily on a low-end laptop with Intel integrated graphics. [SEP] There's nothing wrong with that - but you're really not making an apples to apples comparison here.
+he doesn't have to nor should he. if you take what 2gb says seriously, then you're a fucking idiot. he jokes more than anyone in the scene. sure he could apologize, if there was malicious intent. but there wasn't. again, it's a joke, if you the subject of the joke or people that hear it can't understand that, then it's not the fault of the person talking. being tasteless and juvenile have no relevance in the argument of speech. i'm not going to get in to a debate because this is not the sub for this type of thing. [SEP] it's for sc2 and witch-hunting, which i'm sure you're very much a part of.
+If it was $20-30 a bottle, it'd be about right. If you want to pay a lot and get good scotch, try the older Macallans. Unfortunately they've gotten super-expensive lately, so the 18-year is in the Blue's neighborhood, now. A few years ago when Blue was uber-popular you could get Macallan 30 for the same price. People figured it out, though... Alberlour is way cheaper and also pretty nice, and in the same flavor range. Scotch is one of those things were price and flavor are almost totally uncorrelated. This looks like a good list of flavor profiles and the brands that match them. Total Wine's website is good for sorting by rating (and they use Wine Enthusiast's ratings, not some in-house BS) and checking prices. [SEP] Blue is insipid and sweet and too simple. It's pretty pedestrian for scotch.
+> that doesn't work for a majority of its players? The fuck are you talking about? It works for the vast, vast vast majority of people. There are 180 Thousand people playing right now, peak was at 210 thousand today. There is a small number of people who have issues. And The game fucking works. Some people have issues, yes, welcome to a launch of a game from a small indie company that created their own engine for said game. its normal, its expected. Dont want that to happen to you? Dont fucking play on launch day. Welcome to gaming. Get a clue. [SEP] instead of shutting the fuck up and directing their feedback properly, they went here and started yelling like idiots, and all the other idiots who infest this sub just propell their bullshit.
+Not only did I not ask you, but you didn't resolve the Earth's age at all, so the 'we' is unfounded. You also gave a link to Wikipedia, as if I've never heard anyone's position on the age of the Earth in my life, showing your ability to read as though I am a human being and not some character in your mind is pretty poor. And worst of all, you seem completely oblivious to the fact that you and those who "resolved" the age of the Earth could be completely and utterly wrong for reasons currently unknown, and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to anything--other than making your attitude about it entirely inexcusable. People who work in fields that actually pertain to this kind of thing are aware of how much estimation and extrapolation goes into it. [SEP] This was not a thread for you to run around approving and disapproving of people's positions like some kind of surprise schoolmaster.
+I have still yet to have a precise definition of what this "lack if meta game" people keep referring to actually is. A meta game is how people generally play the game. The Planetside 2 meta game involves everyone playing heavy assault and driving a Sunderer with AMS up to a base and just trying to out-pew pew the defenders. This will probably change once we have actual MLG events in battle islands and the nexus and outfits begin to see just how effective alternative methods are to take bases, such as gal drops, squad beacons, squad deploys, and having more combat medics than heavy assaults. It's just like how people watched Starcraft 2 matches and tried to emulate whatever IdrA, Boxer, etc. did in their matches. This issue of needing continent lattices and crap is just fluff. It's not going to make the game "fun" or purposeful. It's going to be another excuse for people to justify ghost capping dead continents at 3am. The reason the game is boring to people is because most people don't know how to engage in good fights and try to dump 48 man platoons on 12v12 fights and then wonder why all the action goes away. The only "action" they can find are critical mass biolab fights where people don't render 3 feet in front of them. [SEP] Blah blah meta game blah blah.
+Obviously Hog and Bastion are entirely self heal. Moira’s heal stat includes both. I want them separated out so Moira mains don’t have a misunderstanding as to how much team heal vs self heal they are doing. [SEP] Did you read OP?
 You were confused from the very beginning. Other people understood and they were the universalists. If you want a structured debate then why don't you stick to what you do know at r/debatechristianity and learn to be meek here in /r/universalism because this is actually a kind community up until you arrived. [SEP] learn to be meek here in /r/universalism[1] because this is actually a kind community up until you arrived.
-> if they do not follow the law and the procedures of their profession they are held accountable. Actually, in the US, police are routinely not held responsible for egregiously criminal actions. Google "Sean Bell" for a recent example. > you mandate the government when you vote for them Never voted in the 27 years I've been old enough. Just because all the other monkeys choose to participate in selecting someone to tell them what to do does not in any way mandate my participation in that process. I can honestly say I am not responsible for any gov't actions, ever. I suppose you do vote, like the good and obedient lad you doubtless are? [SEP] I suppose you do vote, like the good and obedient lad you doubtless are?
-TL;DR version: Thank you > Secondly, within reasonable limits, it's okay for a loved one like a parent to warn of such things. Less so for perfect strangers picking apart the events of your trauma This is the first I've heard a hint of this. This is all I really wanted to hear. If I had heard something like this on my first related post a few articles ago, I wouldn't have tried to dig further. > Many people who are assaulted, and certainly those who are raped, often relive the event over and over in their mind like its on an endless VHS loop Trust me. I know this. My mom woke me up once when I was staying back at home over a holiday, only I was having a "nightmare". If I didn't experience anything else, having broken my mom's nose by accident is packed in the recesses of my brain too. But I've still my memories and retracings to keep that company. >In sum: they know, without anyone else ever telling them, what they could've done to avoid that trauma. They know 10,000 things that it might have been. They know 9,000 wrong things that it could have been, but wouldn't have made a difference. They may not recognize the 1 or 2 things that actually would have made a difference out of that 10,000, and that will free them going forward. My life got infinitely better when I was able to let go of worrying about most of them, realizing that they really didn't matter, or were so incredibly unlikely that worrying about them actually made things worse. When I was thinking about those 10,000 things, everything was wrong. The entire world was a danger. There was no possibility of safety outside. That's a feeling I don't wish on anyone. And that was the environment I was thankfully mistakenly seeing promulgated here. >You keep saying 'safety', but what exactly does that mean? I had a story of one of my friends here, but it made the post too long. Suffice it to say if you actually do care about "reason" as you say below, I think you know I never meant that absolute safety was achievable. But safety and self defense classes exist for a reason. > Leaving aside for the moment the fact that most women already do behave the way you want them to Well, that's damn offensive. I don't "want women to behave" in any particular way.. and I don't know which way it is you think I want. With the pure offense of this statement I can only imagine that you're telling me that I want women to be miserably crying away in a corner because of all the things they could have done. If that's it, I wouldn't think there is a possibility for rational discussion here, except that you give hints of it in other places. I really don't get the shift in focus unless you were writing the post in stream of consciousness and your mood changed throughout. >what you're suggesting here is part of a certain ideology regarding individualism. The idea that the individual can seize power and shape their world dramatically. Kinda, only to an extent though. You can shape some things. Others you can't. So shape what you can. It's not a black&white, 100%/0% world out there. I'm not even claiming it's 90/10. But you seem to know this by what you say below, and yet you still respond as if you don't. > has been to give people the false impression that they really can do this and that if they just work hard enough and take enough "personal responsibility" they can live in their very own world without rape/crime/etc ALL lessons can be taken extremely, and when they are, they're typically very very wrong. That doesn't mean the intended lesson itself is bad. > Rather than living with the delusion that I have ultimate power over whether or not I, say, get raped I was actually kinda hoping you mistook me gravely enough to think that I was saying there were magical formulas that would ensure perfect safety. There isn't, and nothing I ever wrote should even hint that there is. I made the bad assumption you were reading me with the thought that I might have a deeper than comic book black/white view of the world. It's sad to me that you assume I was that dumb, or that you might think that anyone questioning the automatic application of a judgement for a label is that black/white. Somehow I became a caricature instead of a person. Like I said above. That one sentence was the first time in any response so far that anyone here has hinted that there could possibly be a circumstance. And I tried really hard to leave room for exactly that. But it never came up until then. > I am empowered to know that I can fight from the get-go any internalising of self blame. Which is something every human needs to learn, regardless of every gender, race, creed, etc. However, as we see with any sort of lesson... it can go badly if taken too far. >What I said above is directed primarily at the more extreme version of what you're saying which tends to over-emphasise the power of the individual. So you haven't been arguing against me, but against a caricature of what my arguments could become? I guess I made the bad assumption that when someone responded to me in a conversation they were responding to me. Not dishonestly responding to something else, but pointing it at me. Like I said, all I wanted to hear was that there was a possible time. That was it. I got it, I'm happy. And it wasn't just so I could feel right about something. I was seeing a detachment from reality, and I was really trying to understand. And when continually misunderstood, one tool was to hand out an example of "no sane person could reject this", only to have it rejected because the person wasn't responding to me, but to other people who share my gender (since you mention MRA). >I do everything I can to be safe. Good for you. And not knowing you at all, let alone not knowing your habits, personality, history, etc I wouldn't deign to give you any suggestions about anything. I never meant to imply any sort of "oh, you got assaulted lil lady? well c'mon on down to the men's hut and we'll tell you how the real world works since you're not lucky enough to be one." > called paranoid if we laid out our safety measures time and time again for people, especially men Not likely with me. I am quite the paranoid myself, but fortunately since I'm a guy I seem to be able to get away with it since I'm supposed to be into violence. > MRAs have come into the women's subreddits and openly insulted, degraded or otherwise belittled women who talked about what they do for safety. Even getting called misandrist or profilers for it. I hang out in /r/atheism and /r/christianity a lot so I've seen my share of "invaders" dropping in for things like that. but I've always tried to treat them as individuals on the off chance I'm talking to someone who just phrases things poorly, and not treat them as "an outsider" and respond to them with the vitriol built up by all their predecessors. Thank you for taking some time to do similar for me here. [SEP] So you haven't been arguing against me, but against a caricature of what my arguments could become? I guess I made the bad assumption that when someone responded to me in a conversation they were responding to me. Not dishonestly responding to something else, but pointing it at me.
-I don't know, it's still tricky for me. I went through trauma growing up but made a point to take control of how I think of it and what it does to me. How do you have a relationship with someone with BPD? Do you have to essentially parent them? This all comes from being burned very hard last year by someone with BPD and likely NPD as well (or narcissism manifesting in ASPD). I likely have a degree of NPD though I tend to have some control of it or channel it in a pro-social way (it's also spurred me on to accomplish good things for myself). I had an experience of BPD myself as a result of the breakup with this person. It was horrible - I went from having full control of my emotions to losing it. Flight or fight mechanism was triggered in me, and I froze, hoping they'd stop trying to provoke a fight or give me a greenlight that things were okay. It didn't help that the previous year was spent with a roommate who likely also had it. How do you set limits with people who constantly push them? Is it possible to have a 2 person mature relationship? I gave them room in decision-making and they utterly ruined my life and the relationship. I couldn't have been any more fair. They meanwhile did pity plays, projected their immaturity on me, played mind games, and then expected friendship. After 10 years of knowing one another - they concealed their disorder well. Being in love with them made it horribly difficult. I refused to call them names, like they asked. I have nothing against people with PDs, but I want to learn more and having been raised to be conscious of my behaviour, I expect others to likewise be able to control themselves. I just find it frustrating - the person I was with got sympathy and a job promotion out of the breakup, and my life fell apart. [SEP] I don't know, it's still tricky for me. I went through trauma growing up but made a point to take control of how I think of it and what it does to me.
-Too bad. It's quite cheap to live here and we are hiring at my company at least. Also I like it here. [SEP] It's quite cheap to live here
-I didn't say she was 100% negative, she is extremely caring and would make a good mother. [SEP] she is extremely caring and would make a good mother.
-I suspect this comment will be downvoted, but whatever. Hi, I'm the [S] and the writer of this submission. Disclosure: I do not support GamerGate. My goal with this article isn't to attack you or even GamerGate itself. The quoted argument in the title is one of the most commonly seen arguments made by Gaters, as best as I can tell, and I hope many of you see it that way too. After all, that argument is not a direct attack on women or minorities, so it stands to reason that you shouldn't be accused of misogyny for making it—and I agree! That said, there are aspects to the argument that I think people are overlooking, ignoring or, most likely, simply not realizing when they make it. And that's what this article (and this series) is about: breaking down the argument into the things it actually says and what it means. In the end, I leave it up to the reader to do what they want with the argument—keep using it (but perhaps refine it), stop using it, I don't really care. What I do hope is that if you disagree with it, you can express that disagreement in a way that we can both learn from each other. My goal here isn't to make you feel bad or criticized (which, again, I'm not doing — I'm picking apart only the argument itself), but to hopefuly build a conversation. [SEP] My goal with this article isn't to attack you or even GamerGate itself.
-Straight GW and bant builds get by without it, so not as necessary as it might seem. There is better removal against most threats, as others have pointed out stormbreath but especially Elspeth make it so it's usually good to have access to HD. I think your tone is fairly insulting and your response is totally unthoughtful and dismissive. [SEP] I think your tone is fairly insulting and your response is totally unthoughtful and dismissive.
-Y'all are free to make counterpoints, but you seem to be more interested in tone policing than actually making strong arguments. A cynic might assume that's because there isn't a good counter argument to make. [SEP] A cynic might assume that's because there isn't a good counter argument to make.
-My gym only has one barbell benchpress. My week went like this: Day 1- elderly people training some odd glute exercise by swaddling two benches including the benchpress. Kudos for being in a gym and not a grave homies, I let this one slide and I train back instead. Day 2- scary knuckle dragging bro-dude supersets around benchpress for a solid hour- in between his curls on more curls of course. I avoid eye contact and all costs and train legs instead. Day 3- get my 2k warmup done, think yes, finally, benchpress is free! Negative, a 50 something mumbod straddles benchpress bench and starts doing some variation of a pull-up on the bar. Mumbod Pull ups, are you shitting me? Not today satan. I walk over and politely ask her if she's finished, correctly anticipating her awkward AF departure and I train my barbell bench presses on the equipment whatever divine fitness god created it for. Fucking rookies. [SEP] Day 2- scary knuckle dragging bro-dude supersets around benchpress for a solid hour- in between his curls on more curls of course. I avoid eye contact and all costs and train legs instead
-And yet you are slowing catching on to the problem with coaches that have direct impact on the team during gameplay. You actually pointed that out perfectly with this post. > Every team is capable of this. You're making it sound like only some teams are allowed to have a coach and others aren't. Literally every team is capable of bringing on a coach. Most choose not to because its not as effective for everybody and its even a disadvantage for some teams that already have a competent in-game leader. This is called a handicap. You are better so you are handicapped to get closer to the opponent. Why are you handicapped? Because you basically don't have the option to add a 6th member to your team, as said team member would have no impact on your performance. It's about having an even playing field. And if one team requires a coach to play on the same level as another team without a coach, then the coach-less team should win. And the way to ensure that is to remove the coach from the team. Now we have a even playing field of 2 five-player-teams. The better team will win. [SEP] And yet you are slowing catching on to the problem with coaches that have direct impact on the team during gameplay. You actually pointed that out perfectly with this post.
-Let's say that there is indeed someone in the universe who is right about God. Should they reject the veracity of their religion simply because they happened to grow up somewhere? This is a very strange claim to make. Why would geography and cultural heritage have any bearing whatsoever on this discussion? Again, if anyone is right about this, they will have some sort of location in space and time. You seem to suggest that such particularity is scandalous and reason enough for us to reject the notion of having a thing to be right about at all. Also, do you turn the critique against yourself? If you weren't born here and now, odds are you wouldn't be an atheist (if that's what you are). Does that mean your atheism is wrong? [SEP] Also, do you turn the critique against yourself? If you weren't born here and now, odds are you wouldn't be an atheist (if that's what you are). Does that mean your atheism is wrong?
-Listen, I get the circlejerk you're trying to shout here... But do anything complicated (especially if it's competitive) 10,000+ times and you will learn a few patterns and strategies to it. Suggesting otherwise is about the dumbest fucking claim you could ever make. E This subreddit has an enormous bug up its butt about the supposed difficulty of this game. At 10,000 wins, if you haven't identified a few patterns, you're sub-human. You have failed to succeed at the one trait that allows us to dominate the planet. And you'd be better off running a bot. But you probably couldn't figure out how to configure it so I guess you're stuck there. [SEP] Listen, I get the circlejerk you're trying to shout here...
-they are completely different. >strengthen it no >New headers I think you mean heads, but again no. there is no way to safely boost a N/A block. if you wanted a Turbo'd impreza you should have bought one. [SEP] if you wanted a Turbo'd impreza you should have bought one.
-Oho, now this. Dude, by absolute terms development is like perfection. You can keep arguing no country is developed in the world. You cannot prove absolute development just as you cannot attain absolute perfection. It is utopian. You are using this stupid puerile argument to defend what you have said. Now that walrus does not come here anymore, you have started giveing pedantic arguments. Now do you realise why supersudu didnt argue and left it as you were behaving like a nut-case TN is the most industrialised and the most urbanised state in India. That is enough indication of development for me and other sane minds, cause development is always relative and compared to other states in India TN is fucking well developed. Fin. Stop making pedantic arguments for saving your face. [SEP] saving your face.
-It makes perfect sense if you're capable of processing more than one idea at a time. While his advice is sound, that logic that he uses to give it is flawed. His logic is that good ideas don't require outside assurance. That's his opinion, and maybe something he read from a fortune cookie at one point, but it's hardly sound advice. That's like saying "you're the wisest person in the world, if you don't think it's a good idea, it's not." But hey, we can keep not understanding how the English language works and assuming that "but [...]" immediately contradicts and invalidates a point instead of being used as a conjunction to provide a counterpoint or argument. That's cool too. [SEP] While his advice is sound, that logic that he uses to give it is flawed.
+> if they do not follow the law and the procedures of their profession they are held accountable. Actually, in the US, police are routinely not held responsible for egregiously criminal actions. Google "Sean Bell" for a recent example. > you mandate the government when you vote for them Never voted in the 27 years I've been old enough. Just because all the other monkeys choose to participate in selecting someone to tell them what to do does not in any way mandate my participation in that process. I can honestly say I am not responsible for any gov't actions, ever. [SEP] I suppose you do vote, like the good and obedient lad you doubtless are?
+TL;DR version: Thank you > Secondly, within reasonable limits, it's okay for a loved one like a parent to warn of such things. Less so for perfect strangers picking apart the events of your trauma This is the first I've heard a hint of this. This is all I really wanted to hear. If I had heard something like this on my first related post a few articles ago, I wouldn't have tried to dig further. > Many people who are assaulted, and certainly those who are raped, often relive the event over and over in their mind like its on an endless VHS loop Trust me. I know this. My mom woke me up once when I was staying back at home over a holiday, only I was having a "nightmare". If I didn't experience anything else, having broken my mom's nose by accident is packed in the recesses of my brain too. But I've still my memories and retracings to keep that company. >In sum: they know, without anyone else ever telling them, what they could've done to avoid that trauma. They know 10,000 things that it might have been. They know 9,000 wrong things that it could have been, but wouldn't have made a difference. They may not recognize the 1 or 2 things that actually would have made a difference out of that 10,000, and that will free them going forward. My life got infinitely better when I was able to let go of worrying about most of them, realizing that they really didn't matter, or were so incredibly unlikely that worrying about them actually made things worse. When I was thinking about those 10,000 things, everything was wrong. The entire world was a danger. There was no possibility of safety outside. That's a feeling I don't wish on anyone. And that was the environment I was thankfully mistakenly seeing promulgated here. >You keep saying 'safety', but what exactly does that mean? I had a story of one of my friends here, but it made the post too long. Suffice it to say if you actually do care about "reason" as you say below, I think you know I never meant that absolute safety was achievable. But safety and self defense classes exist for a reason. > Leaving aside for the moment the fact that most women already do behave the way you want them to Well, that's damn offensive. I don't "want women to behave" in any particular way.. and I don't know which way it is you think I want. With the pure offense of this statement I can only imagine that you're telling me that I want women to be miserably crying away in a corner because of all the things they could have done. If that's it, I wouldn't think there is a possibility for rational discussion here, except that you give hints of it in other places. I really don't get the shift in focus unless you were writing the post in stream of consciousness and your mood changed throughout. >what you're suggesting here is part of a certain ideology regarding individualism. The idea that the individual can seize power and shape their world dramatically. Kinda, only to an extent though. You can shape some things. Others you can't. So shape what you can. It's not a black&white, 100%/0% world out there. I'm not even claiming it's 90/10. But you seem to know this by what you say below, and yet you still respond as if you don't. > has been to give people the false impression that they really can do this and that if they just work hard enough and take enough "personal responsibility" they can live in their very own world without rape/crime/etc ALL lessons can be taken extremely, and when they are, they're typically very very wrong. That doesn't mean the intended lesson itself is bad. > Rather than living with the delusion that I have ultimate power over whether or not I, say, get raped I was actually kinda hoping you mistook me gravely enough to think that I was saying there were magical formulas that would ensure perfect safety. There isn't, and nothing I ever wrote should even hint that there is. I made the bad assumption you were reading me with the thought that I might have a deeper than comic book black/white view of the world. It's sad to me that you assume I was that dumb, or that you might think that anyone questioning the automatic application of a judgement for a label is that black/white. Somehow I became a caricature instead of a person. Like I said above. That one sentence was the first time in any response so far that anyone here has hinted that there could possibly be a circumstance. And I tried really hard to leave room for exactly that. But it never came up until then. > I am empowered to know that I can fight from the get-go any internalising of self blame. Which is something every human needs to learn, regardless of every gender, race, creed, etc. However, as we see with any sort of lesson... it can go badly if taken too far. >What I said above is directed primarily at the more extreme version of what you're saying which tends to over-emphasise the power of the individual. Like I said, all I wanted to hear was that there was a possible time. That was it. I got it, I'm happy. And it wasn't just so I could feel right about something. I was seeing a detachment from reality, and I was really trying to understand. And when continually misunderstood, one tool was to hand out an example of "no sane person could reject this", only to have it rejected because the person wasn't responding to me, but to other people who share my gender (since you mention MRA). >I do everything I can to be safe. Good for you. And not knowing you at all, let alone not knowing your habits, personality, history, etc I wouldn't deign to give you any suggestions about anything. I never meant to imply any sort of "oh, you got assaulted lil lady? well c'mon on down to the men's hut and we'll tell you how the real world works since you're not lucky enough to be one." > called paranoid if we laid out our safety measures time and time again for people, especially men Not likely with me. I am quite the paranoid myself, but fortunately since I'm a guy I seem to be able to get away with it since I'm supposed to be into violence. > MRAs have come into the women's subreddits and openly insulted, degraded or otherwise belittled women who talked about what they do for safety. Even getting called misandrist or profilers for it. I hang out in /r/atheism and /r/christianity a lot so I've seen my share of "invaders" dropping in for things like that. but I've always tried to treat them as individuals on the off chance I'm talking to someone who just phrases things poorly, and not treat them as "an outsider" and respond to them with the vitriol built up by all their predecessors. Thank you for taking some time to do similar for me here. [SEP] So you haven't been arguing against me, but against a caricature of what my arguments could become? I guess I made the bad assumption that when someone responded to me in a conversation they were responding to me. Not dishonestly responding to something else, but pointing it at me.
+How do you have a relationship with someone with BPD? Do you have to essentially parent them? This all comes from being burned very hard last year by someone with BPD and likely NPD as well (or narcissism manifesting in ASPD). I likely have a degree of NPD though I tend to have some control of it or channel it in a pro-social way (it's also spurred me on to accomplish good things for myself). I had an experience of BPD myself as a result of the breakup with this person. It was horrible - I went from having full control of my emotions to losing it. Flight or fight mechanism was triggered in me, and I froze, hoping they'd stop trying to provoke a fight or give me a greenlight that things were okay. It didn't help that the previous year was spent with a roommate who likely also had it. How do you set limits with people who constantly push them? Is it possible to have a 2 person mature relationship? I gave them room in decision-making and they utterly ruined my life and the relationship. I couldn't have been any more fair. They meanwhile did pity plays, projected their immaturity on me, played mind games, and then expected friendship. After 10 years of knowing one another - they concealed their disorder well. Being in love with them made it horribly difficult. I refused to call them names, like they asked. I have nothing against people with PDs, but I want to learn more and having been raised to be conscious of my behaviour, I expect others to likewise be able to control themselves. I just find it frustrating - the person I was with got sympathy and a job promotion out of the breakup, and my life fell apart. [SEP] I don't know, it's still tricky for me. I went through trauma growing up but made a point to take control of how I think of it and what it does to me.
+Too bad. and we are hiring at my company at least. Also I like it here. [SEP] It's quite cheap to live here
+I didn't say she was 100% negative, [SEP] she is extremely caring and would make a good mother.
+I suspect this comment will be downvoted, but whatever. Hi, I'm the [S] and the writer of this submission. Disclosure: I do not support GamerGate. The quoted argument in the title is one of the most commonly seen arguments made by Gaters, as best as I can tell, and I hope many of you see it that way too. After all, that argument is not a direct attack on women or minorities, so it stands to reason that you shouldn't be accused of misogyny for making it—and I agree! That said, there are aspects to the argument that I think people are overlooking, ignoring or, most likely, simply not realizing when they make it. And that's what this article (and this series) is about: breaking down the argument into the things it actually says and what it means. In the end, I leave it up to the reader to do what they want with the argument—keep using it (but perhaps refine it), stop using it, I don't really care. What I do hope is that if you disagree with it, you can express that disagreement in a way that we can both learn from each other. My goal here isn't to make you feel bad or criticized (which, again, I'm not doing — I'm picking apart only the argument itself), but to hopefuly build a conversation. [SEP] My goal with this article isn't to attack you or even GamerGate itself.
+Straight GW and bant builds get by without it, so not as necessary as it might seem. There is better removal against most threats, as others have pointed out stormbreath but especially Elspeth make it so it's usually good to have access to HD. [SEP] I think your tone is fairly insulting and your response is totally unthoughtful and dismissive.
+Y'all are free to make counterpoints, but you seem to be more interested in tone policing than actually making strong arguments. [SEP] A cynic might assume that's because there isn't a good counter argument to make.
+My gym only has one barbell benchpress. My week went like this: Day 1- elderly people training some odd glute exercise by swaddling two benches including the benchpress. Kudos for being in a gym and not a grave homies, I let this one slide and I train back instead. . Day 3- get my 2k warmup done, think yes, finally, benchpress is free! Negative, a 50 something mumbod straddles benchpress bench and starts doing some variation of a pull-up on the bar. Mumbod Pull ups, are you shitting me? Not today satan. I walk over and politely ask her if she's finished, correctly anticipating her awkward AF departure and I train my barbell bench presses on the equipment whatever divine fitness god created it for. Fucking rookies. [SEP] Day 2- scary knuckle dragging bro-dude supersets around benchpress for a solid hour- in between his curls on more curls of course. I avoid eye contact and all costs and train legs instead
+> Every team is capable of this. You're making it sound like only some teams are allowed to have a coach and others aren't. Literally every team is capable of bringing on a coach. Most choose not to because its not as effective for everybody and its even a disadvantage for some teams that already have a competent in-game leader. This is called a handicap. You are better so you are handicapped to get closer to the opponent. Why are you handicapped? Because you basically don't have the option to add a 6th member to your team, as said team member would have no impact on your performance. It's about having an even playing field. And if one team requires a coach to play on the same level as another team without a coach, then the coach-less team should win. And the way to ensure that is to remove the coach from the team. Now we have a even playing field of 2 five-player-teams. The better team will win. [SEP] And yet you are slowing catching on to the problem with coaches that have direct impact on the team during gameplay. You actually pointed that out perfectly with this post.
+Let's say that there is indeed someone in the universe who is right about God. Should they reject the veracity of their religion simply because they happened to grow up somewhere? This is a very strange claim to make. Why would geography and cultural heritage have any bearing whatsoever on this discussion? Again, if anyone is right about this, they will have some sort of location in space and time. You seem to suggest that such particularity is scandalous and reason enough for us to reject the notion of having a thing to be right about at all. [SEP] Also, do you turn the critique against yourself? If you weren't born here and now, odds are you wouldn't be an atheist (if that's what you are). Does that mean your atheism is wrong?
+But do anything complicated (especially if it's competitive) 10,000+ times and you will learn a few patterns and strategies to it. Suggesting otherwise is about the dumbest fucking claim you could ever make. E This subreddit has an enormous bug up its butt about the supposed difficulty of this game. At 10,000 wins, if you haven't identified a few patterns, you're sub-human. You have failed to succeed at the one trait that allows us to dominate the planet. And you'd be better off running a bot. But you probably couldn't figure out how to configure it so I guess you're stuck there. [SEP] Listen, I get the circlejerk you're trying to shout here...
+they are completely different. >strengthen it no >New headers I think you mean heads, but again no. there is no way to safely boost a N/A block. [SEP] if you wanted a Turbo'd impreza you should have bought one.
+Oho, now this. Dude, by absolute terms development is like perfection. You can keep arguing no country is developed in the world. You cannot prove absolute development just as you cannot attain absolute perfection. It is utopian. You are using this stupid puerile argument to defend what you have said. Now that walrus does not come here anymore, you have started giveing pedantic arguments. Now do you realise why supersudu didnt argue and left it as you were behaving like a nut-case TN is the most industrialised and the most urbanised state in India. That is enough indication of development for me and other sane minds, cause development is always relative and compared to other states in India TN is fucking well developed. Fin. Stop making pedantic arguments for [SEP] saving your face.
+It makes perfect sense if you're capable of processing more than one idea at a time. His logic is that good ideas don't require outside assurance. That's his opinion, and maybe something he read from a fortune cookie at one point, but it's hardly sound advice. That's like saying "you're the wisest person in the world, if you don't think it's a good idea, it's not." But hey, we can keep not understanding how the English language works and assuming that "but [...]" immediately contradicts and invalidates a point instead of being used as a conjunction to provide a counterpoint or argument. That's cool too. [SEP] While his advice is sound, that logic that he uses to give it is flawed.
 Since you went to wikipedia, please do read, and comprehend, the entirety of the article not just the portion you think is preserving your narrative. E.g. you ignored the part in the article about republic, right next to the line you chose to quote, that said; "In modern times, the definition of a republic is commonly limited to a government which excludes a monarch," so perhaps you could have been projecting when accusing my definition of being "dishonest." FWIW the rule of law in this context (the US system of government) comes mainly from the "constitutional" part of things, which we were not discussing. There are plenty of constitutional democracies, ruled by law, which are not republics. Just like there are plenty of democratic constitutional republics, like France, which have a more parliamentary structure unlike the US. Again, technically the US is a Federation of States forming a Democratic Constitutional Republic. So the point still stands; the US is both a Democracy and a Republic. Saying the US is not a republic would be as mistaken as claiming it not being a democracy. Cheers. [SEP] The rule of law comes mainly from the "constitutional" part of things,
-Ugh these comments. Article after article, thousands of #metoos, and yet some people just can’t empathize enough or imagine what it’s like to be in that woman’s shoes. I’m losing hope that men will ever understand what it’s like, unless it’s actually happened to them. So, so many women are assaulted or abused and nothing can be done. When is the focus going to shift from the burden being on the woman to “how do we stop men from doing this”? (Yes, I know women can abuse/rape, too, but it’s largely a male problem and a problem with society and gender) [SEP] Ugh these comments. Article after article, thousands of #metoos, and yet some people just can’t empathize enough or imagine what it’s like to be in that woman’s shoes.
-The free will question simply gives me insight into the way you think. But, going back to you "i don't know" ... correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that you believed that there was nothing outside our perceivable realm. Or, do you acknowledge that there may be something there, but until you are provided proof of its existence you have no intention of putting any effort into contemplating it? ... as for this, >1. There are things we don't know (true). >2. There might be a spiritual connection of sorts (unfounded) >3. Therefore, we might measure spiritual connections in the future. you are definitely close but I wouldn't make the relationship so linear. See, my interpretation is that there are thousands of potential #2s, and there is a one to one relationship between #2 and #3. Hence, for each #2 that turns out to be correct, a #3 is possible in the future. Hope that makes sense. [SEP] have no intention of putting any effort into contemplating it?
-I only come off as a "dick" because I don't agree with you. And I do find some pleasure in coming to progun and speaking a dissenting opinion, because frankly you all need it. Your perspective is warped to the point that you can completely ignore that our country is embarrassingly violent compared to other civilized nations, and our gun culture is to blame. You sit on your forums and pat each other on the back while our life expectancy dwindles because the gun proliferation lobby is flooding our towns and cities with deadly instruments. I don't understand what kind of a point you're making with your statistics. Each day almost 300 Americans are shot, intentionally and unintentionally. That works out to about 100k per year. And I am not sure what the point of your statistics is. Do you not realize that those rates are higher than any other civilized, Western nation? Are you proud of that? [SEP] I only come off as a "dick" because I don't agree with you.
-I never attempted to motivate anybody. If you read through my comments that will be clear to see. All I want is an understanding of your justifications. I simply want to understand what is going through your heads. > The reason none of my friends will ever try tofu is because they know a guy like you. Nah mate. The reason your friends won't try tofu is because they hate being wrong, and when faced with the facts of the dairy and meat industries, their opinions are proven wrong and they don't like it. [SEP] Nah mate. The reason your friends won't try tofu is because they hate being wrong, and when faced with the facts of the dairy and meat industries, their opinions are proven wrong and they don't like it.
+I’m losing hope that men will ever understand what it’s like, unless it’s actually happened to them. So, so many women are assaulted or abused and nothing can be done. When is the focus going to shift from the burden being on the woman to “how do we stop men from doing this”? (Yes, I know women can abuse/rape, too, but it’s largely a male problem and a problem with society and gender) [SEP] Ugh these comments. Article after article, thousands of #metoos, and yet some people just can’t empathize enough or imagine what it’s like to be in that woman’s shoes.
+The free will question simply gives me insight into the way you think. But, going back to you "i don't know" ... correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that you believed that there was nothing outside our perceivable realm. Or, do you acknowledge that there may be something there, but until you are provided proof of its existence you ... as for this, >1. There are things we don't know (true). >2. There might be a spiritual connection of sorts (unfounded) >3. Therefore, we might measure spiritual connections in the future. you are definitely close but I wouldn't make the relationship so linear. See, my interpretation is that there are thousands of potential #2s, and there is a one to one relationship between #2 and #3. Hence, for each #2 that turns out to be correct, a #3 is possible in the future. Hope that makes sense. [SEP] have no intention of putting any effort into contemplating it?
+And I do find some pleasure in coming to progun and speaking a dissenting opinion, because frankly you all need it. Your perspective is warped to the point that you can completely ignore that our country is embarrassingly violent compared to other civilized nations, and our gun culture is to blame. You sit on your forums and pat each other on the back while our life expectancy dwindles because the gun proliferation lobby is flooding our towns and cities with deadly instruments. I don't understand what kind of a point you're making with your statistics. Each day almost 300 Americans are shot, intentionally and unintentionally. That works out to about 100k per year. And I am not sure what the point of your statistics is. Do you not realize that those rates are higher than any other civilized, Western nation? Are you proud of that? [SEP] I only come off as a "dick" because I don't agree with you.
+I never attempted to motivate anybody. If you read through my comments that will be clear to see. All I want is an understanding of your justifications. I simply want to understand what is going through your heads. > The reason none of my friends will ever try tofu is because they know a guy like you. [SEP] Nah mate. The reason your friends won't try tofu is because they hate being wrong, and when faced with the facts of the dairy and meat industries, their opinions are proven wrong and they don't like it.
 I think your point about what people thought is probably correct. I will say that the resolution voted at the conference said > 11.A Campaign for a Charter Amendment will put maximum pressure on the City Council to deliver, but only if it is a credible and winnable initiative. We recognize that we must deal wit the specific situation of small business and non-profit in an understandable way for Seattle voters, including many workers, who will be concerned about the impacts of $15. 15Now talk about this city council strategy in multiple media accounts. If you don't see the Seattle city council passing this ordinance, with the $15 dollar figure, with no permanent tip credit, with no opt out for any sized business, with no franchise opt-out, with COLA included at all as a victory, that is your prerogative. I personally see it as a victory, after years of no policy pushed by a socialist party adopted as legislation. I look to activists in other locations celebrating $12, $10.10, $9.50, $8 and ask, what was different? Labor was active in all those fights and they didn't push for $15, even though that was the demand of the striking workers. > not being honest about it is really damaging to their reputation, as it is insulting to the public I guess we will have to see. Would it have been worse to only have 15k valid signatures? Would it have been worse to say that the ordinance wasn't good enough and let Murray market this as his victory, when he was only dragged into this? Sawant and Spear mentioned using this as a tool to pressure the city council at most oportunity- When 15Now wants to mobilize people to gather signatures and there is less enthusiasm then anticipated, how to you convey this central goal without further demobilizing volunteers? I think SA was honest, and sadly with only 1 public official we can only get our strategy across in so many platforms. [SEP] but only if it has a credible chance of winning
->where women are held to a different standard. So much of this. He did try and talk me into us both dating women at first but I said no. I was treated like I cheated because I didn't ask for permission first, even though he never asked for permission. He tried to tell me I couldn't have sex with a guy because he had met him, even though he'd previously introduced me to a girl who he later ended up hooking up with (I only found out because I asked why she was completely ignoring me now.) He wanted me to wait so he could get a head start because it was harder for men to get laid than for women to. Tried to get me to agree to only have one night stands. So much bullshit. In retrospect it's pretty easy to see my biggest problem was that he was a misogynist, but he spun everything so it was so progressive and feminist. You probably don't want to get me started on last name bullshit. I fucking hate that shit. I never took my husband last name, but everyone assumes I did and they won't stop using it on shit. My state government sent me me tax return check with my husband's last name. WTF? And my family has shamed me over it. Theyre still shaming me over it and I'm not even married anymore. Marriage was awful for me. Being a "wife" was hell. I thought we could be different and go against society, but there was so much push back on it. And as soon as I got married my husband started spouting shit like, "What will they think, your my wife." I don't know dipshit, maybe you should have thought about that before talking me into this open relationship bullshit. I just hate all of it. I'm never getting married again. >that doesn't mean its a good idea to just burn the rulebook. I agree with this. Nothing against promiscuous women who love it, but I tried it and I think it's made me even more vulnerable to the relationship inequalities that are inherent in gender. I'm strictly monogamous now and I'm just trying to sort through the rule book to see what works for me and what doesn't. [SEP] You probably don't want to get me started on last name bullshit. I fucking hate that shit. I never took my husband last name, but everyone assumes I did and they won't stop using it on shit. My state government sent me me tax return check with my husband's last name. WTF? And my family has shamed me over it. Theyre still shaming me over it and I'm not even married anymore.
-This is true, but you also have to realize that people in cold climates often log hundreds of hours driving in icy conditions. These Southern folk here, bless their hearts, simply lack the experience of constant commuting in snow/ice. [SEP] bless their hearts
-> Still though, you first attack my ability as a player and now you're creating some conspiracy that I don't like things because they personally affect they way I play. Maybe stop it with the character assassination. It's not character assassination. I'm trying to find why you think it's OP. Is it the counter to your favorite build? Are you low skilled and can't perform the evasions+block+pick up the weapons (that's not a knock, some people aren't good at this game and there is nothing wrong with that). [SEP] (that's not a knock, some people aren't good at this game and there is nothing wrong with that).
+>where women are held to a different standard. So much of this. He did try and talk me into us both dating women at first but I said no. I was treated like I cheated because I didn't ask for permission first, even though he never asked for permission. He tried to tell me I couldn't have sex with a guy because he had met him, even though he'd previously introduced me to a girl who he later ended up hooking up with (I only found out because I asked why she was completely ignoring me now.) He wanted me to wait so he could get a head start because it was harder for men to get laid than for women to. Tried to get me to agree to only have one night stands. So much bullshit. In retrospect it's pretty easy to see my biggest problem was that he was a misogynist, but he spun everything so it was so progressive and feminist. Marriage was awful for me. Being a "wife" was hell. I thought we could be different and go against society, but there was so much push back on it. And as soon as I got married my husband started spouting shit like, "What will they think, your my wife." I don't know dipshit, maybe you should have thought about that before talking me into this open relationship bullshit. I just hate all of it. I'm never getting married again. >that doesn't mean its a good idea to just burn the rulebook. I agree with this. Nothing against promiscuous women who love it, but I tried it and I think it's made me even more vulnerable to the relationship inequalities that are inherent in gender. I'm strictly monogamous now and I'm just trying to sort through the rule book to see what works for me and what doesn't. [SEP] You probably don't want to get me started on last name bullshit. I fucking hate that shit. I never took my husband last name, but everyone assumes I did and they won't stop using it on shit. My state government sent me me tax return check with my husband's last name. WTF? And my family has shamed me over it. Theyre still shaming me over it and I'm not even married anymore.
+This is true, but you also have to realize that people in cold climates often log hundreds of hours driving in icy conditions. These Southern folk here, , simply lack the experience of constant commuting in snow/ice. [SEP] bless their hearts
+> Still though, you first attack my ability as a player and now you're creating some conspiracy that I don't like things because they personally affect they way I play. Maybe stop it with the character assassination. It's not character assassination. I'm trying to find why you think it's OP. Is it the counter to your favorite build? Are you low skilled and can't perform the evasions+block+pick up the weapons [SEP] (that's not a knock, some people aren't good at this game and there is nothing wrong with that).
 > Sarcasm is a lot less funny when the person reveals they have zero idea what they're talking about. The first mistake is assuming I think I know anything or think I'm particularly intelligent. >You and the OP of the original pic have a lot in common, apparently. Thank you. At least he's got a sense of humor and doesn't come off as self important and uptight. I'm sure he realizes there is some underlying reason that they became de rigueur in Asia. I doubt he thinks the reason is because Chinese people are stupid. It seems to me that he's just making a humorous observation about how cultural norms aren't always the most efficient or logical thing possible. [SEP] I doubt he thinks the reason is because...
-My boyfriend told me this exactly, so next time I was upset I told him exactly why and was very calm about it. He got incredibly upset and defensive about what I said and then dumped me that night. I will never understand men [SEP] why and was very calm about it.
-As you seem to keep whining with an erroneous argument, i'll copypaste my reply: First of all, you're not right. Every person with some economy knowledge would know that. Your only argument is to use google to keep your bullshit. First, the market has almost gone back to where it was before the brexit. How is it not the point, buddy? How is it not? That's the whole claim you did, the fact that the brexit caused "enormous losses". The fact that the pound tanked. But, in fact, the pound has recovered. And the marked is fully recovering. The chart clearly shows a drop after the brexit and a steady, oingoing recovery. As you're such an ignorant kid, you can't see why your argument is wrong. The "FTSE 100" graphic, had you used your useless mind insead of google, would show you how the market is recovering instead of being a crash. Also, you're the "ignorant smartass". Do you have any knowledge about how market share works? I invest. Do you invest, buddy? As i told you, stop googleing. It's worthless, because the same things you link are proving you wrong. [SEP] As you're such an ignorant kid,
-Stop being a pompous dick. Please stop being an apologist for left wing politics. Name a single inherently left wing position that is evidently good for the long term wellbeing of human society and the planet as a whole. Cite a specific policy/position and your academic sources. Name a single inherently right wing position that is evidently bad for the long term wellbeing of human society and the planet as a whole. Cite a specific policy/position and your academic sources. Because I can do the opposite. In fact, I already gave you an example of evidently harmful and inherently left wing policy. Here is what the right historically stood for: Freedom of speech, agency and personal responsibility, equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome, abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, civil rights, rights for ALL rather than using the feelings of some to infringe upon rights of others, Capitalism, monoculturalism, paying for your own damn healthcare and college, universal human rights through the promotion of western culture, the free market, secularism AND religious freedom, cognitive liberty, the exaltation of intellectualism, putting cooperation and mutual over competition and hate, actual egalitarianism. The left traditionally stood against all these things. Seems to me like the right represents all that is good in our society and that the left opposes all that is good. If the right is wrong, it acknowledges it and improves based on the existing evidence and arguments (as it seeks to actually do what's best). The left is practically all about doing something that harms society to benefit elites, being right/wrong when it comes to society as a whole isn't really one of their concerns, often being caught hiding evidence, etc. (just look at the environmental protection or tax debates, etc.). Left wing politics harms our society and the planet. Period. ...see, appropriating common moral principles and attributing them to the left and also spoon feeding in garbage like multiculturalism, which has been proven to destroy societies (see Robert Putnam's study) is not effective. [SEP] and also spoon feeding in garbage like multiculturalism, which has been proven to destroy societies (see Robert Putnam's study) is not effective.
-Sounds like you are appealing to emotion rather than logic (a common problem when women attempt to engage in a discussion). Nothing here has shown that they just want to hit women, yet that is your go to statement. I am curious how someone like yourself, who is a feminist, thinks it's fair for women to assault people without any expectation of retaliation? [SEP] Sounds like you are appealing to emotion rather than logic (a common problem when women attempt to engage in a discussion).
-i'll say it again, slowly this time (speaking of reading comprehension): you're conflating the overall cellphone market with the smartphone market. they are not the same thing, at all. perhaps you can tell me how the S5 is better than the 5S? must be that 64bit processor that samsung stuck in there - wait, they didn't do that at all. please try to stick to facts, and not opinions. when the lead designer steps down after the poor reception of the S5, that should be a clue. [SEP] i'll say it again, slowly this time (speaking of reading comprehension): you're conflating the overall cellphone market with the smartphone market. they are not the same thing, at all.
->In the modern world their really is no longer any excuse for a reasonable adult to cling to religion. This reeks of someone who doesn't understand the human psyche or social structures. The irrationality of faith doesn't absolve humanity of genetics or psychology. >It is especially frustrating when people that seem to have some understanding of science are part of these cults. I have neither the time nor the inclination, but given the choice between, say, respecting Albert Einstein's opinion on whether a scientist can belong to a 'cult' and your opinion, I'm going to ever so slightly lean his way. [SEP] I have neither the time nor the inclination, but given the choice between, say, respecting Albert Einstein's opinion on whether a scientist can belong to a 'cult' and your opinion, I'm going to ever so slightly lean his way.
-I mean... yeah? I'm getting a strong holier-than-thou vibe from your post - like you're the only one who's aware of colorism, colonialism, or internalized racism, and everyone else hasn't done any soul-searching whatsoever. You've correctly identified a lot of issues that we Asian Americans face, but stuff like this: >In my Asian feminist community I have also seen yellow fever as a way to avoid discussing the profound amount of internalized racism in our own communities ...seems really out of touch and dismissive of others' concerns. Like, it's important to talk about internalized racism. Great. And if women want to talk about yellow fever, we should be able to do that too without some jab about how we're "avoiding" the real issues. >Putting white out on my own blood line is not a way to fight white supremacy Literally no one said it was. >I have met many white people dating "out of their race" that perpetrate racism. I especially see this in pairings with white men and Asian women. This is starting to sound like another of those, "I'm not telling you who to date, but you should date who I think you should date" posts. Idk. I'm just so sick of this whole shtick, like, "I'm the only #woke Asian woman and the rest of y'all are white worshipping hoes #WAKEUPSHEEPLE." Can we just discuss racism without calling other women dumb? [SEP] I'm getting a strong holier-than-thou vibe from your post - like you're the only one who's aware of colorism, colonialism, or internalized racism, and everyone else hasn't done any soul-searching whatsoever.
-Most people are not properly able to distinguish between what kind of information can be taken from this kind of study vs other studies with more power. By presenting this as a potential treatment, it is likely that some people will think they can try this instead of medication. [SEP] Most people are not properly able to distinguish between what kind of information can be taken from this kind of study vs other studies with more power.
-I posted an image from my mobile for people to see. I'm sorry you're offended, it's only a graph. Would you prefer an involved infographic with exaggerated and out of context data to appeal to emotion? I'm sure you spend your time in reddit pursuing more gracious causes [SEP] I'm sorry you're offended, it's only a graph.
-The problem is that the views of the people in Iceland have almost no affect on my life (or the lives of most of the people in r/atheism who live in the states). I live in the Southern US, and I can assure you that over 95% of people I know are Christians and a large majority of them refute evolution and global warming. Now, that is not to say that all religious people deny science. I just wanted to point out the relevant information in regards to many of the people in r/atheism. That point is that a staggering number of religious people here in the US are completely illogical and irrational. The religious people here who disregard science are not the minority in any sense of the word. I suppose I should have been clearer as to my point though... [SEP] I live in the Southern US
-Well the obvious difference is he's not sitting there pointing his finger at an individual, but I think it's a stupid point to argue. Sanders and Bill often display their frustration with the system (in Sanders' case) or an idea as a whole (Bill and Black Lives Matter), whereas Hillary seems to focus far too often on individuals. [SEP] Well the obvious difference is he's not sitting there pointing his finger at an individual
-I wouldn't go so far as to say it's crap - after all, it serves the same purpose that any poorly-conceived tattoo does. It lets you know that it's attached to the sort of person who said "Man, I want to get something tattooed on my flesh that will be there for the rest of my life that really tells people who I am - I will point to one of these pictures on the wall of the tattoo shop/get my drunk friend to do it at home/get something awful that I mistakenly think is deep or cool because I'm a fucking idiot". A bad tattoo is incredibly useful; it's a helpful indicator that the owner can safely be dismissed as inconsequential. Which is a good tool to have in a world with so many damn people in it. [SEP] A bad tattoo is incredibly useful; it's a helpful indicator that the owner can safely be dismissed as inconsequential.
-Double reply but would it make more sense to go with gamemaker instead of construct for flexibility? I'm a little worried that the drag and drop system would limit what I can do. If i'm wrong in this anxiety lemme know, I'm gonna explore both programs (game maker and Construct). In your experience does construct limit what you can implement? Or is there drag and drop system expansive enough to implement whatever I can think of. [SEP] Double reply but would it make more sense to go with gamemaker instead of construct for flexibility?
-Oh boy, I struck a nerve, didn't I? >You know damned well my a "I'm don't agree with X, but" doesn't mean I swing to one extreme or the other, I try and rest in a middle area. Balance is the only way we achieve progress, extremes lead to zealous bigotry or violence. Temper, temper. >So if I were to ask you how you felt about abortion what would you say? Would you say that it is a woman's right to decide no matter the circumstance? If the baby was just a week from its due date, would you find no problem with abortion? Is there a limit to things? I would Say that it is wholly the right of the person in question. If a woman wishes such for herself and the child she carries so be it. She has every right to control her body and no one else. >What about free speech? Do you believe in the right to free speech? Yes. Note Below: >Do you believe that the Westboro Baptist Church has every right to commit dead troops and others to hell and blame homosexuals for their deaths? You're implying there's an afterlife. Although, they have every right to do such, 1st Amendment rights and whatnot. I doubt there's a sane man on this planet who'd agree with what they say, but I will defend their right to say it. And after this, you kind of just started digressing away from your point. Best to keep arguments on the internet short and sweet Honey. [SEP] Oh boy, I struck a nerve, didn't I?
-You’re detached from reality. Hopefully you move on to a happier place so young Quebeckers dont have as much exposure to your outdated attitudes and beliefs. So many people have wasted so much of their energy on the wrong thing. I guess not uncommon, but such a shame. You probably look back on it with fond and romantic memories, but think of where Québec could have been today had that effort been spent on something better. Maybe Montreal would still be the largest city in the country? You’re holding Québec back. [SEP] You’re holding Québec back.
-So you want a government that protects your precious feelings?So your feelings and judgement should be sacrosanct? Why do you feel the government should be your mother/ father figure teaching you morality? I think if it isn't a call for violence then it shouldn't be policed. [SEP] Why do you feel the government should be your mother/ father figure teaching you morality?
+My boyfriend told me this exactly, so next time I was upset I told him exactly He got incredibly upset and defensive about what I said and then dumped me that night. I will never understand men [SEP] why and was very calm about it.
+As you seem to keep whining with an erroneous argument, i'll copypaste my reply: First of all, you're not right. Every person with some economy knowledge would know that. Your only argument is to use google to keep your bullshit. First, the market has almost gone back to where it was before the brexit. How is it not the point, buddy? How is it not? That's the whole claim you did, the fact that the brexit caused "enormous losses". The fact that the pound tanked. But, in fact, the pound has recovered. And the marked is fully recovering. The chart clearly shows a drop after the brexit and a steady, oingoing recovery. you can't see why your argument is wrong. The "FTSE 100" graphic, had you used your useless mind insead of google, would show you how the market is recovering instead of being a crash. Also, you're the "ignorant smartass". Do you have any knowledge about how market share works? I invest. Do you invest, buddy? As i told you, stop googleing. It's worthless, because the same things you link are proving you wrong. [SEP] As you're such an ignorant kid,
+Stop being a pompous dick. Please stop being an apologist for left wing politics. Name a single inherently left wing position that is evidently good for the long term wellbeing of human society and the planet as a whole. Cite a specific policy/position and your academic sources. Name a single inherently right wing position that is evidently bad for the long term wellbeing of human society and the planet as a whole. Cite a specific policy/position and your academic sources. Because I can do the opposite. In fact, I already gave you an example of evidently harmful and inherently left wing policy. Here is what the right historically stood for: Freedom of speech, agency and personal responsibility, equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome, abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, civil rights, rights for ALL rather than using the feelings of some to infringe upon rights of others, Capitalism, monoculturalism, paying for your own damn healthcare and college, universal human rights through the promotion of western culture, the free market, secularism AND religious freedom, cognitive liberty, the exaltation of intellectualism, putting cooperation and mutual over competition and hate, actual egalitarianism. The left traditionally stood against all these things. Seems to me like the right represents all that is good in our society and that the left opposes all that is good. If the right is wrong, it acknowledges it and improves based on the existing evidence and arguments (as it seeks to actually do what's best). The left is practically all about doing something that harms society to benefit elites, being right/wrong when it comes to society as a whole isn't really one of their concerns, often being caught hiding evidence, etc. (just look at the environmental protection or tax debates, etc.). Left wing politics harms our society and the planet. Period. ...see, appropriating common moral principles and attributing them to the left [SEP] and also spoon feeding in garbage like multiculturalism, which has been proven to destroy societies (see Robert Putnam's study) is not effective.
+Nothing here has shown that they just want to hit women, yet that is your go to statement. I am curious how someone like yourself, who is a feminist, thinks it's fair for women to assault people without any expectation of retaliation? [SEP] Sounds like you are appealing to emotion rather than logic (a common problem when women attempt to engage in a discussion).
+perhaps you can tell me how the S5 is better than the 5S? must be that 64bit processor that samsung stuck in there - wait, they didn't do that at all. please try to stick to facts, and not opinions. when the lead designer steps down after the poor reception of the S5, that should be a clue. [SEP] i'll say it again, slowly this time (speaking of reading comprehension): you're conflating the overall cellphone market with the smartphone market. they are not the same thing, at all.
+>In the modern world their really is no longer any excuse for a reasonable adult to cling to religion. This reeks of someone who doesn't understand the human psyche or social structures. The irrationality of faith doesn't absolve humanity of genetics or psychology. >It is especially frustrating when people that seem to have some understanding of science are part of these cults. [SEP] I have neither the time nor the inclination, but given the choice between, say, respecting Albert Einstein's opinion on whether a scientist can belong to a 'cult' and your opinion, I'm going to ever so slightly lean his way.
+I mean... yeah? You've correctly identified a lot of issues that we Asian Americans face, but stuff like this: >In my Asian feminist community I have also seen yellow fever as a way to avoid discussing the profound amount of internalized racism in our own communities ...seems really out of touch and dismissive of others' concerns. Like, it's important to talk about internalized racism. Great. And if women want to talk about yellow fever, we should be able to do that too without some jab about how we're "avoiding" the real issues. >Putting white out on my own blood line is not a way to fight white supremacy Literally no one said it was. >I have met many white people dating "out of their race" that perpetrate racism. I especially see this in pairings with white men and Asian women. This is starting to sound like another of those, "I'm not telling you who to date, but you should date who I think you should date" posts. Idk. I'm just so sick of this whole shtick, like, "I'm the only #woke Asian woman and the rest of y'all are white worshipping hoes #WAKEUPSHEEPLE." Can we just discuss racism without calling other women dumb? [SEP] I'm getting a strong holier-than-thou vibe from your post - like you're the only one who's aware of colorism, colonialism, or internalized racism, and everyone else hasn't done any soul-searching whatsoever.
+By presenting this as a potential treatment, it is likely that some people will think they can try this instead of medication. [SEP] Most people are not properly able to distinguish between what kind of information can be taken from this kind of study vs other studies with more power.
+I posted an image from my mobile for people to see. Would you prefer an involved infographic with exaggerated and out of context data to appeal to emotion? I'm sure you spend your time in reddit pursuing more gracious causes [SEP] I'm sorry you're offended, it's only a graph.
+The problem is that the views of the people in Iceland have almost no affect on my life (or the lives of most of the people in r/atheism who live in the states). , and I can assure you that over 95% of people I know are Christians and a large majority of them refute evolution and global warming. Now, that is not to say that all religious people deny science. I just wanted to point out the relevant information in regards to many of the people in r/atheism. That point is that a staggering number of religious people here in the US are completely illogical and irrational. The religious people here who disregard science are not the minority in any sense of the word. I suppose I should have been clearer as to my point though... [SEP] I live in the Southern US
+, but I think it's a stupid point to argue. Sanders and Bill often display their frustration with the system (in Sanders' case) or an idea as a whole (Bill and Black Lives Matter), whereas Hillary seems to focus far too often on individuals. [SEP] Well the obvious difference is he's not sitting there pointing his finger at an individual
+I wouldn't go so far as to say it's crap - after all, it serves the same purpose that any poorly-conceived tattoo does. It lets you know that it's attached to the sort of person who said "Man, I want to get something tattooed on my flesh that will be there for the rest of my life that really tells people who I am - I will point to one of these pictures on the wall of the tattoo shop/get my drunk friend to do it at home/get something awful that I mistakenly think is deep or cool because I'm a fucking idiot". Which is a good tool to have in a world with so many damn people in it. [SEP] A bad tattoo is incredibly useful; it's a helpful indicator that the owner can safely be dismissed as inconsequential.
+I'm a little worried that the drag and drop system would limit what I can do. If i'm wrong in this anxiety lemme know, I'm gonna explore both programs (game maker and Construct). In your experience does construct limit what you can implement? Or is there drag and drop system expansive enough to implement whatever I can think of. [SEP] Double reply but would it make more sense to go with gamemaker instead of construct for flexibility?
+>You know damned well my a "I'm don't agree with X, but" doesn't mean I swing to one extreme or the other, I try and rest in a middle area. Balance is the only way we achieve progress, extremes lead to zealous bigotry or violence. Temper, temper. >So if I were to ask you how you felt about abortion what would you say? Would you say that it is a woman's right to decide no matter the circumstance? If the baby was just a week from its due date, would you find no problem with abortion? Is there a limit to things? I would Say that it is wholly the right of the person in question. If a woman wishes such for herself and the child she carries so be it. She has every right to control her body and no one else. >What about free speech? Do you believe in the right to free speech? Yes. Note Below: >Do you believe that the Westboro Baptist Church has every right to commit dead troops and others to hell and blame homosexuals for their deaths? You're implying there's an afterlife. Although, they have every right to do such, 1st Amendment rights and whatnot. I doubt there's a sane man on this planet who'd agree with what they say, but I will defend their right to say it. And after this, you kind of just started digressing away from your point. Best to keep arguments on the internet short and sweet Honey. [SEP] Oh boy, I struck a nerve, didn't I?
+You’re detached from reality. Hopefully you move on to a happier place so young Quebeckers dont have as much exposure to your outdated attitudes and beliefs. So many people have wasted so much of their energy on the wrong thing. I guess not uncommon, but such a shame. You probably look back on it with fond and romantic memories, but think of where Québec could have been today had that effort been spent on something better. Maybe Montreal would still be the largest city in the country? [SEP] You’re holding Québec back.
+So you want a government that protects your precious feelings?So your feelings and judgement should be sacrosanct? I think if it isn't a call for violence then it shouldn't be policed. [SEP] Why do you feel the government should be your mother/ father figure teaching you morality?
 As many ways as we want. Especially when this is hurting U.S. companies. We don't need to apologize for giving a shit about our future. [SEP] Especially when this is hurting ~~U.S. companies~~ everyone
-> Are you going to cherrypick the part that allows you to continue holding your position or are you going to take the idea that that person put forth in gestalt, including them specifying their precise objection? That was literally what they said, I'll even quote it for you, and bear in mind that this is his entire post: >>I'm not talking about color-blindness on an institutional or governmental level. >We're on the same page. >>I'm talking about as an individual. >We're on the same page. >>Personally I believe that it's wrong to assume things about someone based on their race. >We're still on the same page. >>I acknowledge that racism is still an issue in the US but I choose to still be color-blind. I don't see how that makes the racism issue worse. >Aaaaand here is where we split ways. The reason I posted that quote, in particular, is that your life (as a presumably-white person) was molded predominantly by people and media influences which did not give significant exposure to non-white perspectives. Therefore, although what you're preaching closely resembles the famed MLK quote, >>I have a dream that my four little children will one day be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character >your ideology is not at all in alignment with that of MLK, because, owing to your drastically different formative experiences, you have drastically different standards for judging character. Knickerbockers says that the reason that a white person being colorblind is racist while a black person being colorblind is not, simply because white and black people judge character differently. There are a load of problems with that sentiment, one of which being the fact that apparently colorblindness is ok only for individuals who have been hurt. So that isn't cherrypicking, at all, I'm arguing with his entire premise. >Empathy is literally feeling what another person is feeling. You cannot feel what someone else feels unless you understand their situation. You cannot feel what someone who has lost their child before their time until you've been through something comparable. What you're describing is sympathy. It's not the same thing. You can sympathize with them. You don't know what they're feeling. You don't understand what they're going through. It's sort of weird for you to think that you can or do when you haven't. Weird and/or presumptive. You're wrong. Empathy is a route to better understanding a person, not the other way around. [SEP] You're wrong. Empathy is a route to better understanding a person, not the other way around.
-> From this: It's an accurate statement to say that I haven't seen anyone who could be considered an advocate of social justice suggest we need to "tear white people down". That's not to say I haven't seen a lot of people try to claim that various statements are implying that ... but I've never seen anyone actually make the claim, no. Rhetoric is a dangerous business, and a lot of people are very quick to try and read into things which aren't necessarily there. >But there are people saying those things, and there are plenty of them. I'm glad you condemn them. You tell me you're not saying these people don't exist, then you're saying... these people don't exist. Saying I've never seen anyone say something that it's being claimed they do say is a different thing than saying that extremists don't exist. The OP was saying, and you've made several references which imply that you agree with him on it, that there's a huge number of people saying these extremist things to the point where it's "all I hear about". I'm suggesting that in regards to there being a mass swarm of extremists spouting these views ... they don't exist. Fringe extremists, sure. Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but you keep making reference to how many of them there are ... "plenty of them" and things like that. I get the impression that you want me to say that there's loads of them, and that's the part of my speech you're taking issue with. But I don't want to strawman you if that's not the case. >You can tell yourself that, but I saw and heard a lot of booing in the video when BLM supporters hijacked the mic from Bernie at a rally. It's certainly not all one giant group that's exactly the same people as you implied. If you've come to the rally to see Bernie, you're going to boo when pretty much anyone takes the mic off him, no? I don't think it's logical to construe that as a statement of the crowd's views on BLM. >Its not dangerous territory at all to suggest that what someone (an individual) doesn't talk about is just as important as what they do. Especially in the context of that particular title. Especially in the context of intersectionality. The point is to view privilege on a multitude of layers. Ignoring one of, and likely the most important layer when talking about "life's lowest difficulty setting" speaks volumes about the author. As I said, we tend to talk about social inequality and income inequality separately, for right or wrong. I say it's dangerous territory because, if I was interested in playing that game, I could turn this around on this very subreddit and talk about all the things you choose to discuss on here and all the things you choose not to discuss and draw an awful lot of unsavoury conclusions about KiA. But I'm not going to do that, because as I say I'm not interested in playing that game. And I would encourage you to also not get involved in the "you didn't talk about this, therefore that says a lot about you" game. >If you take his statement literally, which would be understandable, sure. But if you can see that there are people saying this kind of thing or heavily implying it in the media and on social media - which is likely what he's talking about - then I have to disagree. I do take it literally, because it's his feelings. When you're depressed, it can feel like everybody's against you and everybody's attacking you. That's why I see it as important to point out that, as you say, it's not literally true. You don't want to feed someone else's shitty feelings which say that everybody's against you. It's very not healthy, speaking from painful experience. >It's not awful to question his experience. Emotions warp our perception of reality. What I'm telling you is that there are definitely people behaving the way he's talking about. ... There is plenty of material out there in line enough with the OPs feelings that he doesn't have to misinterpret anything to be surrounded by it all day. But definitely not to the degree that it's 'everywhere' and all that people are telling him/you. But there is a scenario where it can seem like that, and that's if you're perceiving people talking about white privilege as a personal attack on you. Which I don't think is deniable that a lot of people do? Hell, there's other people responding to me right here who are saying I'm attacking white people for simply saying that white privilege exists. If you view people talking about white privilege through a lens where you assume they're attacking white people ... then yes, suddenly it becomes all encompassing and so many people are attacking whites. Because a lot of people are talking about white privilege, and rightly so. The problem is that talking about white privilege isn't necessarily (and in almost all cases definitively isn't) an attack on white people. But that's a difference in world view, I feel. I'm not going to convince someone who really believes that white privilege doesn't exist that I'm not attacking white people by talking about it. >We live in an internet world. You choose what to surround yourself with regards to the media for the most part. Which when you're depressed is not always a good thing. [SEP] If you view people talking about white privilege through a lens where you assume they're attacking white people ... then yes, suddenly it becomes all encompassing and so many people are attacking whites. Because a lot of people are talking about white privilege, and rightly so. The problem is that talking about white privilege isn't necessarily (and in almost all cases definitively isn't) an attack on white people.
-Point to somewhere in the future or past. You cannot. Everything IS the present moment. This is fact. If everything is the present moment, then the idea of past, future is illusion. We only change. I know you hate me because I believe something you don't believe, but that is kind of idiotic don't you think. My goal is to help people. My goal is to open minds to new concept, otherwise you are stuck in stagnacy. How do you think scientist find out new information? They look. They explore new directions. They don't just sit around Noping about. I want to call you an idiot and get out of my face, but I know that you are just another incarnation of the great I AM, and I should treat you as if you are me. So I bid you adieu, wish you farewell, have a good day, see you in hell. (just kidding - but it rhymed) [SEP] My goal is to help people.
-I'm not avoiding your question/concern. We just had to come to an understanding first. On my farms, I haven't seen non-target species die off. I've got milkweeds a-plenty in my ditches, fence rows, and around the ponds. Monarchs were around, while the weather was warm. I walk/scout my fields every week (and this includes along the fence lines), looking for bug kills and weeds popping up. This is purely anecdotal, so the impact factor of my statements should be low. Instead, give this a read. People with much more money and resources than me have a better grasp on the possible scope of pollen shed. [SEP] I'm not avoiding your question/concern. We just had to come to an understanding first.
-"What are you expecting, a formal thesis with APA-style citations addressed to an audience who will never read it or take it seriously?" I took that as you implying he shouldn't make an effort to improve his tweeting because nobody takes him seriously anyway. Fox is the most watched cable news network and is filled with anchors who support Trump. Conservatives own talk radio. Breitbart is far more popular than it's left-leaning equivalents. If there are two sides available to choose from, that's just the free market doing what it does. Trump himself seems to love heavily biased news when it's biased in his favor, so why does he care if some isn't? I don't remember Obama ranting on twitter about negative press either, despite Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and others painting him as the antichrist. [SEP] I don't remember Obama ranting on twitter about negative press either, despite Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and others painting him as the antichrist.
-Take it with a grain of salt... If he (or she. I'm going to go with he) wasn't allowed to read his Bible in school you can guess there was more to it than "because the Constitution." Based on his description of himself as a bigger distraction than the class clown and being a lazy-ass prick, and the fact that we know he had a chip on his shoulder there was likely something else going on, like him making a scene out of reading the bible. He is flat out lying when he says that the reason he brought it to school is because he had finished all the books at home. Homes stocked with books (homes that approve of reading) acquire more books when the kid tears through them, even if it's just so they can brag to everyone about how smart their kid is. You're telling me there was no library in the school or the town? Bullshit. This kid brought a Bible to school because -assuming he is smarter than everyone else, especially the teachers- he thought it was untouchable and couldn't be taken away from him. He probably put on some little show with his Bible, pulling out quotes that were lascivious or edgy or that he thought he could use against his teachers. I'm not a teacher, and I'm not a Christian, but I know kids, and I KNOW know-it-all kids. (Having been one, myself.) That kid's entire identity depended on his constantly "proving" that he was smarter than everyone else. I'm not the least bit surprised that his retelling casts the teachers as unjustifiable morons. [SEP] He is flat out lying when he says that the reason he brought it to school is because he had finished all the books at home. Homes stocked with books (homes that approve of reading) acquire more books when the kid tears through them, even if it's just so they can brag to everyone about how smart their kid is. You're telling me there was no library in the school or the town? Bullshit.
->They do. SR deals with a flat spacetime. GR deals with a dynamic spacetime. This curvature explains the force of gravity. That's funny, I particularly like how you fucked up GR and SR, and got it the wrong way around. GR deals with flat spacetime, and SR deals with dynamic spacetime. SR deals with bodies in motion within the spacetime and GR deals with spacetime as created by a static body (non-moving). And just a few posts ago you told me the GR is not about spacetime, but is about gravity! So who's getting things wrong and who does not appear to understand? We'll I guess it is a bit complex, perhaps you are not the right person for this debate after all. >This curvature explains the force of gravity. So you can use your extensive knowledge of GR and SR to explain why something falls down when you let it go? And now you are saying again that Gravity is a 'force' and therefore somehow separate from spacetime. Obviously your understanding of the subject is poor, because when it actually comes down to explaining it you just flounder. So it is this 'force of gravity' that explains why things in motion and static mass influence the length of spacetime? (or the length of time?) and if so how? This brings me back to LCDM, and allows me to questions then why you require the ability to 'dial in' extra gravity so that the 'opposing force' to gravity does not cause galaxies to 'fly apart', and of course you cant explain how this other mysterious force (centrifugal force) acts like an anti-gravity force. (straight from Newton). And why you simulate cosmic motion using Newtonian dynamics. Why can't you measure or observe any curvature? Treating it as a curvature how do you explain the differences in the duration of time at different locations. Is it infinite geodesics or something. Does the 'worldlines' imply that this space length of time does not correspond to an equivalent length change in space? Thus giving you your 'time like' and 'space like' curvy bits? It appears you really do not have a strong understanding after all, but you can quote from books like a demon it appears. Now I know what you understand, and what you don't understand. You do not understand that Relativity describes and predicts the dimension of spacetime length. Relativity describes spacetime, the properties of spacetime determines why things fall down, and why things orbit. It describes why GPS clocks measure different time, and it describes why LIGO measures changes in length (not shape). [SEP] GR deals with flat spacetime, and SR deals with dynamic spacetime
-No, you know what, we can't stop posting about the shit we've had to put up with. They sold us a broken product, which gives us every right to be angry, but that's not it! It has been broken for half a year! As soon as we forget about the MCC and only care about H5, we have lost as consumers. We've allowed a big corporation as Microsoft to screw us over completely. "Oh you're going to buy Halo 5? Psh fucking idiot, I bet you sleep at night under 343's crusty ballsack. You deserve to be treated like shit." No. That's not what we are saying. No one said that. What we are saying though is that people that preorder Halo 5 completely accept that they've been forced to pay 120 dollars for ONE functioning game. I can't say that enough. I think Halo 5 is going to be fantastic, I loved the beta, and I bet it will work at launch, but if I preorder the game it's like I've completely forgot that they made me pay for something that didn't work. They can't fix the MCC by releasing a working Halo 5. "Umm, guys, it's a video game. If they want to spend their money on that, then that's their decision. You don't own the franchise, Microsoft and 343 do." It's not just about a video game. It's about consumers being fucked over by large companies. It's anyones decision if they want to buy Halo 5 or not, but I will not sit and watch while others accept the fact that they are being screwed over, without saying anything. Us complaining about this isn't even about us hoping that the MCC will soon be fixed anymore. It will probably still be broken when H5 launches. You say: "Find something else to occupy our time with while the MCC continues to be fixed." I have waited. I have waited for half a year. I defended them the first months. Shit happens. They'll fix it, and we'll be fine soon. Then, just the other day, I realized that I've been waiting for far too long, and the reality that the MCC most likely never will see that day where it's completely fixed dawned upon me. Believe me, we know that our shouts won't change shit. But if we, just for one moment, stay silent about it, we'll start forgetting. We'll forget how Microsoft made us pay 60 dollars for a broken product, and we'll then pay another 60 dollars for something that just might work. "Well yeah, it shouldn't have been, but it was, so we can't really go back in time and fix anything now can we?" You're right. We can't. That is exactly why we are shouting about it. If we can't fix it, then we most certainly can't forget about it. " "We have every right to complain" You do, but that doesn't mean we really need to hear about it, or believe that we should be treated like shit just because we're excited about the new installment in the franchise." You shouldn't be treated like shit for being excited by the new installment in the franchise. It's very hard to see the sad reality when it comes to something you love. I want to preorder and be overly excited about Halo 5 and buy the hell out of it on release. But I won't, because if I do, I know that I've let the big corporation win. They might earn a damned lot of money out of others, but at least I'll know that they didn't win me over. Nobody is treating you like shit because you are excited about Halo 5. Just because they tell you that you shouldn't preorder it, it doesn't mean they're treating you like shit. They are just trying to protect us as consumers from being screwed by the big guys. They haven't let Microsoft win them over yet, and that's why they go against you. Because it's the only way to make you realize. And maybe, someday, we'll all realize what is happening. And once and for all, we will stand together, and say: No. Not again. [SEP] Nobody is treating you like shit because you are excited about Halo 5. Just because they tell you that you shouldn't preorder it, it doesn't mean they're treating you like shit. They are just trying to protect us as consumers from being screwed by the big guys. They haven't let Microsoft win them over yet, and that's why they go against you. Because it's the only way to make you realize. And maybe, someday, we'll all realize what is happening. And once and for all, we will stand together, and say: No. Not again.
->The issue is that perseveration doesn't only kick up when it's something you enjoy. You can perseverate with something you don't like in order to avoid something you don't like even more. (E.x. cleaning to avoid homework) > "Doesn't only" works both ways. The issue is finding ways to interrupt it when necessary. Perseveration, in ADHD, is usually triggered by things that stimulate a person past a specific threshold. Using anxiety to trigger perseveration in order to procrastinate... That's a different issue. I fail to see its relevance. >The other issue is that equating "avid" (very eager/wanting to do something very much) reader with perseveration makes it sound like reading is a choice. It isn't, because perseveration isn't a choice. Perseveration is literally doing something in excess, beyond what you actually want to do. That's not eagerness, it's compulsion and I don't think we should romanticize it. > You talk like you think you're a slave. "Oh noes! There isn't a choice!" That sentiment contains less truth than you believe. You have a choice about how you respond to it, and what you do with it. Knowing ADHD as I do now, diagnosed as an adult, all this information could have changed my life had I known it earlier, even without access to meds. In terms of Low Arousal Theory perseveration is triggered by things that stimulate us. Look at all the thing ADHD people do to self stim. From fidgeters to adrenaline junkies. They're all associated with increasing dopamine levels, which means that they aren't generally associated with discomfort. Time management is a skill. Knowing one's own ADHD is also a skill. Time management with ADHD is a very special skill (which I don't claim to have mastered, that would be a lie). Use alarms, e.g. the Pomodoro technique, or any other method available to interrupt perseveration. e.g. Do your reading where you know you will be interrupted if you can't afford to lose too much time to it.. Perseveration is. To use a saying I hate, "It is what it is." You can view it negatively and dwell on how much you hate it... or you can find advantages and learn to work with and around it. >Also, what do you mean we should be able to do "well" at something when we learn to like/enjoy it? It isn't necessarily a question of whether someone enjoys reading. I enjoy reading but I literally can't do it for an extended period of time unless I'm medicated/perseverating. Would that make me bad at reading? Medication raises your state closer to that arousal threshold. That's why you can (mildly?) perseverate and/or read easier on it. In this framework, maybe you don't love reading. Maybe you're like me with maths and have issues with it (not maths phobic, but some kind of hangup). Maybe you just don't enjoy it enough. (Enjoyment is also arousal, btw.) Have you never found anything you enjoyed reading enough to get lost in it? You do know that neurotypicals get lost in reading, film, and music too, right? Not usually as powerfully, but they do (and "neurotypical" isn't as well defined as people like to think it is). On meds, I have to take extra care. Sometimes it's "improved focus" and sometimes it's mild/low grade perseveration. And it can be a fine line between. I have alarms on my phone to warn me about break time, because I can become time blind with certain tasks. We also have to learn to keep the larger task in focus (and not get lost wikipedia surfing, for example). This is both easier and harder on meds. You seem to have a bias against ADHD symptoms and are determined to see them as negatives. You will never be able to separate yourself from ADHD; it had a hand in forming you. Without ADHD, you wouldn't recognise yourself. As contradictory as it may sound, you need to learn to accept yourself while bettering yourself. Civilisation has not existed very long, and modern society since the industrial revolution is is nothing compared to how long our species has been evolving. To automatically assume that the neuro-atypical is defective or "ill" is not logical. If you look at the epidemiology statistics for ADHD, we are too many to be a recent accident, it is genetic. We were not culled by evolution. That means we must have had advantages. Admittedly, they don't seem well suited to modern society, but you can only work with what you've got. Are you going to work with it, or are you going to resent it? Bitterness and anger as motivators can only carry you so far. And they rarely help one be a better person. [SEP] You have a choice about how you respond to it, and what you do with it.
-Honestly I just feel sorry for you. I wanna try and help, I could of laughed like "hahaha how pathetic is this and kept scrolling" (because people do that probably all the time) but I wanna try and just openly give some advice. If you wanna reject it in your bubble that's fine. But if you actually want advise on anything, just message me or talk it here, no skin off my back. [SEP] But if you actually want advise on anything
-Let's cut this analogy even finer. If someone comes in with a wound infection, you don't simply start them on IV antibiotics. First, you examine the wound: is it purulent, traumatic, bleeding? Giving out hormones without a psychiatric evaluation is the equivalent of giving out antibiotics without examining the wound. Is she manic? Obsessive compulsive? Depressed? In the US, I guarantee the clinic she went to does not have a mental health professional on hand. There just are not enough to go around. So... My suspicion is that she showed up without a referral from the therapist and expected to recieve hormones off the bat. And... In an atypical presentation (gender dysphoria presenting at 19 is atypical), the doctor wasn't comfortable starting hormones yet. She even mentioned in the replies that she could've started hormones there, but they were "rude." [SEP] She even mentioned in the replies that she could've started hormones there, but they were "rude."
-As far as I can tell, your argument is that a lot of men are just assholes to everyone, so women on the receiving end of condescension shouldnt think its specifically because they are women? Notwithstanding that many many women will say that, in their experience, they are subject to comments that men are not. Anyway, you demanded studies Anderson and Leaper. 1998. “Meta-Analysis of Gender Effects on Conversational Inturruption: Who, What, When, Where, and Why.” Sex Roles 39(3-4):225-252. Farley, Ashcroft, Stasson, and Nusbaum. 2010. “”Nonverbal Reactions to Conversational Inturruptions: A Test of Complementary Theory and Status/Gender Parallel.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 34(4):193-206. Hancock and Rubin. 2015. “Influence of Communication Partner’s Gender on Language.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 34(1):46-64. Kollock, Blumstein, and Schwartz. 1985. “Sex and Power in Interaction: Conversational privileges and Duties. American Sociological Review 50(1):34-46 http http http [SEP] As far as I can tell, your argument is that a lot of men are just assholes to everyone, so women on the receiving end of condescension shouldnt think its specifically because they are women?
-It wouldn't be wrong to consider women inferior when comparing men and women side-by-side. But the reality of things is, we cannot compare men to women even though we are all a subset of the group humans. Instead, we must judge both genders to their respective standards. There are some qualities that are more pertinent in women than men, and likewise some more pertinent in men than women. Hence, men and women need to be judged to two entirely different standards. [SEP] Hence, men and women need to be judged to two entirely different standards.
-That's such backwards thinking. That's like questioning how many rape allegations are false. Just because a handful are made up doesn't discredit the overwhelming majority. More importantly, it doesn't discredit the actual problem of sexual harassment. [SEP] it doesn't discredit the actual problem of sexual harassment.
-I think there are two problems here: 1. IQ tests are a flawed measure of intelligence. These flaws range from practice effects, to cultural bias, to problems with statistical and theoretical modeling. An IQ difference of "15 points", or 1 standard deviation on one of the scales used to describe IQ, was used in the horribly racist book "The Bell Curve" to give fake validity to the claim that black people are less intelligent than white people. (Spoiler warning: They are not.) I have a feeling that your claim of a 15 point difference for a specific subgroup of Jews has similar problems to those of the book. Also: "Most" IQ test? Which ones? If it really is "most", many of them will use sometimes wildly differing methods of standardization, so "15" points is absolutely meaningless. For example, some tests use a mean of 50, and a standard deviation of 10, others use 100 and 15, or 100 and 10 - z standardization uses 0 and 1, respectively. I repeat: "15 points" is meaningless, even before going into the flaws of IQ models in general. 2. Where do most Nobel Prize winners come from? Do they really come from all over the world, or only from a select sample of industrialized nations, with the necessary facilities and education systems to even produce Nobel candidates? How big is the proportion of people with Jewish ancestry in these countries compared to the proportion of people with Jewish ancestry in this, more specific, population? How big is the proportion of people with Jewish ancestry in academia? In short: Your "statistics" have a terrible flaw: Selection bias. You need to intelligently select your sample and the population you want to draw conclusions from/compare it with to make any sense. The way you put it now, every impoverished inhabitant of a third-world country with no access to even basic education figures in on the "against" side of the argument, skewing your "results". Source: Undergrad-level knowledge of Psychology and Statistics. [SEP] You need to intelligently select your sample and the population you want to draw conclusions from/compare it with to make any sense. The way you put it now, every impoverished inhabitant of a third-world country with no access to even basic education figures in on the "against" side of the argument, skewing your "results".
-I would like to clarify a few things, and I hope my clarifications generate no animosity between us. I consider myself a pretty open minded individual and I can see both sides of the argument. But I do feel you're dealing with some misinformation, and maybe some bias in your own statement. Maybe I'm wrong, and if so, I would like to be corrected. I hope we can have a friendly, and productive conversation - and perhaps we can both learn from it. Trump proposed banning further Muslim immigration, not banning Islam, as you seem to believe. Additionally, the ban it's about securing boarders, not about hate towards a group or race of people. He has obviously taken steps towards limiting other types of immigration as well, and the reasons for this are many. However, I feel that there is a stereotype towards Islam that has only been reinforced by recent attacks in Europe, and despite those responsible being part of a small minority, people are getting scared. It's natural for people to want to feel safe, and it's hard to feel secure in an airport when the last thing you heard on the news was a report of scores of people murdered in an airport. I have friends who were going to visit Brussels this month, but have canceled their plans. It is the same concept as your Disneyland example, but on a worldwide scale, and not hypothetical. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Islam is the inherent problem, there have been many instances throughout history where the teachings of a religion has been misinterpreted and led to bloodshed (Christianity, for example). But there is something off regarding the silence from the Islamic community, I feel that it would do a great deal of good if Americans saw a rising up of the peaceful majority of Islamic believers. A public outcry against the acts of violence, especially in countries where there are large Islamic communities would make a world of difference on the global outlook towards Islam as a religion. But until that happens, until there is more positive than negative coverage of Islam, this trend of stereotyping will continue to slip forward, and probably result in some pretty bad situations. America will always be a place of free religion, as long as that religion doesn't inhibit the freedoms of others. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church is allowed to exist even though they represent a truly corrosive "religion" which blatantly harbor hate and use it for their own devices. In no way will the Islamic religion, at it's core, ever get close to this level of indecency. I don't see Islam or Muslims being banned from America. I don't feel that, in my town, there is excessive stereotyping against Muslims or Islam. A few notes on your "common factors": Not all terrorists are Muslim. [ http Not all terrorists are men. Being in the military, I've closely studied the tactics of terrorists and the use of woman is common, especially in war zones. [ http Many terrorists have not killed people. If you think that every misguided Islamic follower immediately meanders off to murder someone or a group of people you would be wrong. Terrorists are not on a lower level of intelligence, they aren't mindless killing zombies. Some comb the internet, searching for converts tot their cause. Some spread verbal terrorism (words that incite hate and violence). And some sit at home and silently cheer their comrades onward. Terrorism is a movement, "terrorist" is not a status that one gains on blowing themselves up in public. [SEP] But there is something off regarding the silence from the Islamic community, I feel that it would do a great deal of good if Americans saw a rising up of the peaceful majority of Islamic believers. A public outcry against the acts of violence, especially in countries where there are large Islamic communities would make a world of difference on the global outlook towards Islam as a religion.
-Did you read the rest of the post after that sentence where it’s explained how they��re only doing it to women, not other men? And how just about every trans person notices a huge difference in the amount of condescension they get when they transition to a different gender? You can tell it’s gender-based, not just regular condescension. Women get condescension more than men BECAUSE they’re women. [SEP] Women get condescension more than men BECAUSE they’re women.
-Meat industry reform is impossible given present demand, it will not happen. Reform also requires activism, most people don't particularly desire to be activists. We hope that one day enough people decide to eat plant products instead, and animal agriculture shrinks slowly. I don't know where you get this weird idea from that vegans feel so superior, or have some bizarre Utopian view of things. We think animal agriculture is terrible, so we abstain from contributing to it in the way that most matters to all industry: monetarily. It's the same reason I abstain from plenty of stuff that I think is unethical, while still realizing that I'm not some saint who is single-handedly saving the world. Quick pedantic point: Being vegan really is cheap and easy once you get the hang of things, it's really not the expensive and difficult luxury non-vegans make it out to be, at least not for most. [SEP] We think animal agriculture is terrible, so we abstain from contributing to it in the way that most matters to all industry: monetarily.
-Right, but that's not a wedding. $90/plate for a full, multi-course dinner meal with attentive wait staff can be normal depending on the city you live in. You'd know this if you ever tried to plan a wedding you'd be surprised how astronomical shit can be. My wedding was under $3k but average weddings are $20k and it someone wants to spend that, it's their decision. [SEP] You'd know this if you ever tried to plan a wedding
-> Regarding your assertion that Siri's "understanding" is not the same as human understanding, of course it is not the same. They may not even be comparable. They are different systems completely. If you accept this then I don't see how you can assert people are overestimating the competence of humans when assessing AI when you acknowledge they are different systems and may not be comparable. I guess you believe that symbol manipulation without meaning is equivalent to symbol manipulation with meaning? > The fact that they are not the same is a non-sequitur, however, in that not being the same does not imply one has greater or lesser "understanding" than the other. Well I believe its clear that humans do have a greater understanding than Siri of communication and the symbols being manipulated. I already provided sources of a huge body of work across multiple disciplines from philosophy to linguistics to neuroscience that illustrate exactly why humans do indeed have much greater understanding than Siri does. I guess where we disagree is you don't think its possible to claim that humans have a greater understanding of manipulating language symbols for meaning than Siri? Or maybe you are claiming that meaning doesn't matter in this case all that matters is symbol manipulation? [SEP] I already provided sources of a huge body of work across multiple disciplines from philosophy to linguistics to neuroscience that illustrate exactly why humans do indeed have much greater understanding than Siri does.
+> Are you going to cherrypick the part that allows you to continue holding your position or are you going to take the idea that that person put forth in gestalt, including them specifying their precise objection? That was literally what they said, I'll even quote it for you, and bear in mind that this is his entire post: >>I'm not talking about color-blindness on an institutional or governmental level. >We're on the same page. >>I'm talking about as an individual. >We're on the same page. >>Personally I believe that it's wrong to assume things about someone based on their race. >We're still on the same page. >>I acknowledge that racism is still an issue in the US but I choose to still be color-blind. I don't see how that makes the racism issue worse. >Aaaaand here is where we split ways. The reason I posted that quote, in particular, is that your life (as a presumably-white person) was molded predominantly by people and media influences which did not give significant exposure to non-white perspectives. Therefore, although what you're preaching closely resembles the famed MLK quote, >>I have a dream that my four little children will one day be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character >your ideology is not at all in alignment with that of MLK, because, owing to your drastically different formative experiences, you have drastically different standards for judging character. Knickerbockers says that the reason that a white person being colorblind is racist while a black person being colorblind is not, simply because white and black people judge character differently. There are a load of problems with that sentiment, one of which being the fact that apparently colorblindness is ok only for individuals who have been hurt. So that isn't cherrypicking, at all, I'm arguing with his entire premise. >Empathy is literally feeling what another person is feeling. You cannot feel what someone else feels unless you understand their situation. You cannot feel what someone who has lost their child before their time until you've been through something comparable. What you're describing is sympathy. It's not the same thing. You can sympathize with them. You don't know what they're feeling. You don't understand what they're going through. It's sort of weird for you to think that you can or do when you haven't. Weird and/or presumptive. [SEP] You're wrong. Empathy is a route to better understanding a person, not the other way around.
+> From this: It's an accurate statement to say that I haven't seen anyone who could be considered an advocate of social justice suggest we need to "tear white people down". That's not to say I haven't seen a lot of people try to claim that various statements are implying that ... but I've never seen anyone actually make the claim, no. Rhetoric is a dangerous business, and a lot of people are very quick to try and read into things which aren't necessarily there. >But there are people saying those things, and there are plenty of them. I'm glad you condemn them. You tell me you're not saying these people don't exist, then you're saying... these people don't exist. Saying I've never seen anyone say something that it's being claimed they do say is a different thing than saying that extremists don't exist. The OP was saying, and you've made several references which imply that you agree with him on it, that there's a huge number of people saying these extremist things to the point where it's "all I hear about". I'm suggesting that in regards to there being a mass swarm of extremists spouting these views ... they don't exist. Fringe extremists, sure. Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but you keep making reference to how many of them there are ... "plenty of them" and things like that. I get the impression that you want me to say that there's loads of them, and that's the part of my speech you're taking issue with. But I don't want to strawman you if that's not the case. >You can tell yourself that, but I saw and heard a lot of booing in the video when BLM supporters hijacked the mic from Bernie at a rally. It's certainly not all one giant group that's exactly the same people as you implied. If you've come to the rally to see Bernie, you're going to boo when pretty much anyone takes the mic off him, no? I don't think it's logical to construe that as a statement of the crowd's views on BLM. >Its not dangerous territory at all to suggest that what someone (an individual) doesn't talk about is just as important as what they do. Especially in the context of that particular title. Especially in the context of intersectionality. The point is to view privilege on a multitude of layers. Ignoring one of, and likely the most important layer when talking about "life's lowest difficulty setting" speaks volumes about the author. As I said, we tend to talk about social inequality and income inequality separately, for right or wrong. I say it's dangerous territory because, if I was interested in playing that game, I could turn this around on this very subreddit and talk about all the things you choose to discuss on here and all the things you choose not to discuss and draw an awful lot of unsavoury conclusions about KiA. But I'm not going to do that, because as I say I'm not interested in playing that game. And I would encourage you to also not get involved in the "you didn't talk about this, therefore that says a lot about you" game. >If you take his statement literally, which would be understandable, sure. But if you can see that there are people saying this kind of thing or heavily implying it in the media and on social media - which is likely what he's talking about - then I have to disagree. I do take it literally, because it's his feelings. When you're depressed, it can feel like everybody's against you and everybody's attacking you. That's why I see it as important to point out that, as you say, it's not literally true. You don't want to feed someone else's shitty feelings which say that everybody's against you. It's very not healthy, speaking from painful experience. >It's not awful to question his experience. Emotions warp our perception of reality. What I'm telling you is that there are definitely people behaving the way he's talking about. ... There is plenty of material out there in line enough with the OPs feelings that he doesn't have to misinterpret anything to be surrounded by it all day. But definitely not to the degree that it's 'everywhere' and all that people are telling him/you. But there is a scenario where it can seem like that, and that's if you're perceiving people talking about white privilege as a personal attack on you. Which I don't think is deniable that a lot of people do? Hell, there's other people responding to me right here who are saying I'm attacking white people for simply saying that white privilege exists. But that's a difference in world view, I feel. I'm not going to convince someone who really believes that white privilege doesn't exist that I'm not attacking white people by talking about it. >We live in an internet world. You choose what to surround yourself with regards to the media for the most part. Which when you're depressed is not always a good thing. [SEP] If you view people talking about white privilege through a lens where you assume they're attacking white people ... then yes, suddenly it becomes all encompassing and so many people are attacking whites. Because a lot of people are talking about white privilege, and rightly so. The problem is that talking about white privilege isn't necessarily (and in almost all cases definitively isn't) an attack on white people.
+Point to somewhere in the future or past. You cannot. Everything IS the present moment. This is fact. If everything is the present moment, then the idea of past, future is illusion. We only change. I know you hate me because I believe something you don't believe, but that is kind of idiotic don't you think. My goal is to open minds to new concept, otherwise you are stuck in stagnacy. How do you think scientist find out new information? They look. They explore new directions. They don't just sit around Noping about. I want to call you an idiot and get out of my face, but I know that you are just another incarnation of the great I AM, and I should treat you as if you are me. So I bid you adieu, wish you farewell, have a good day, see you in hell. (just kidding - but it rhymed) [SEP] My goal is to help people.
+On my farms, I haven't seen non-target species die off. I've got milkweeds a-plenty in my ditches, fence rows, and around the ponds. Monarchs were around, while the weather was warm. I walk/scout my fields every week (and this includes along the fence lines), looking for bug kills and weeds popping up. This is purely anecdotal, so the impact factor of my statements should be low. Instead, give this a read. People with much more money and resources than me have a better grasp on the possible scope of pollen shed. [SEP] I'm not avoiding your question/concern. We just had to come to an understanding first.
+"What are you expecting, a formal thesis with APA-style citations addressed to an audience who will never read it or take it seriously?" I took that as you implying he shouldn't make an effort to improve his tweeting because nobody takes him seriously anyway. Fox is the most watched cable news network and is filled with anchors who support Trump. Conservatives own talk radio. Breitbart is far more popular than it's left-leaning equivalents. If there are two sides available to choose from, that's just the free market doing what it does. Trump himself seems to love heavily biased news when it's biased in his favor, so why does he care if some isn't? [SEP] I don't remember Obama ranting on twitter about negative press either, despite Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and others painting him as the antichrist.
+Take it with a grain of salt... If he (or she. I'm going to go with he) wasn't allowed to read his Bible in school you can guess there was more to it than "because the Constitution." Based on his description of himself as a bigger distraction than the class clown and being a lazy-ass prick, and the fact that we know he had a chip on his shoulder there was likely something else going on, like him making a scene out of reading the bible. This kid brought a Bible to school because -assuming he is smarter than everyone else, especially the teachers- he thought it was untouchable and couldn't be taken away from him. He probably put on some little show with his Bible, pulling out quotes that were lascivious or edgy or that he thought he could use against his teachers. I'm not a teacher, and I'm not a Christian, but I know kids, and I KNOW know-it-all kids. (Having been one, myself.) That kid's entire identity depended on his constantly "proving" that he was smarter than everyone else. I'm not the least bit surprised that his retelling casts the teachers as unjustifiable morons. [SEP] He is flat out lying when he says that the reason he brought it to school is because he had finished all the books at home. Homes stocked with books (homes that approve of reading) acquire more books when the kid tears through them, even if it's just so they can brag to everyone about how smart their kid is. You're telling me there was no library in the school or the town? Bullshit.
+>They do. SR deals with a flat spacetime. GR deals with a dynamic spacetime. This curvature explains the force of gravity. That's funny, I particularly like how you fucked up GR and SR, and got it the wrong way around. . SR deals with bodies in motion within the spacetime and GR deals with spacetime as created by a static body (non-moving). And just a few posts ago you told me the GR is not about spacetime, but is about gravity! So who's getting things wrong and who does not appear to understand? We'll I guess it is a bit complex, perhaps you are not the right person for this debate after all. >This curvature explains the force of gravity. So you can use your extensive knowledge of GR and SR to explain why something falls down when you let it go? And now you are saying again that Gravity is a 'force' and therefore somehow separate from spacetime. Obviously your understanding of the subject is poor, because when it actually comes down to explaining it you just flounder. So it is this 'force of gravity' that explains why things in motion and static mass influence the length of spacetime? (or the length of time?) and if so how? This brings me back to LCDM, and allows me to questions then why you require the ability to 'dial in' extra gravity so that the 'opposing force' to gravity does not cause galaxies to 'fly apart', and of course you cant explain how this other mysterious force (centrifugal force) acts like an anti-gravity force. (straight from Newton). And why you simulate cosmic motion using Newtonian dynamics. Why can't you measure or observe any curvature? Treating it as a curvature how do you explain the differences in the duration of time at different locations. Is it infinite geodesics or something. Does the 'worldlines' imply that this space length of time does not correspond to an equivalent length change in space? Thus giving you your 'time like' and 'space like' curvy bits? It appears you really do not have a strong understanding after all, but you can quote from books like a demon it appears. Now I know what you understand, and what you don't understand. You do not understand that Relativity describes and predicts the dimension of spacetime length. Relativity describes spacetime, the properties of spacetime determines why things fall down, and why things orbit. It describes why GPS clocks measure different time, and it describes why LIGO measures changes in length (not shape). [SEP] GR deals with flat spacetime, and SR deals with dynamic spacetime
+No, you know what, we can't stop posting about the shit we've had to put up with. They sold us a broken product, which gives us every right to be angry, but that's not it! It has been broken for half a year! As soon as we forget about the MCC and only care about H5, we have lost as consumers. We've allowed a big corporation as Microsoft to screw us over completely. "Oh you're going to buy Halo 5? Psh fucking idiot, I bet you sleep at night under 343's crusty ballsack. You deserve to be treated like shit." No. That's not what we are saying. No one said that. What we are saying though is that people that preorder Halo 5 completely accept that they've been forced to pay 120 dollars for ONE functioning game. I can't say that enough. I think Halo 5 is going to be fantastic, I loved the beta, and I bet it will work at launch, but if I preorder the game it's like I've completely forgot that they made me pay for something that didn't work. They can't fix the MCC by releasing a working Halo 5. "Umm, guys, it's a video game. If they want to spend their money on that, then that's their decision. You don't own the franchise, Microsoft and 343 do." It's not just about a video game. It's about consumers being fucked over by large companies. It's anyones decision if they want to buy Halo 5 or not, but I will not sit and watch while others accept the fact that they are being screwed over, without saying anything. Us complaining about this isn't even about us hoping that the MCC will soon be fixed anymore. It will probably still be broken when H5 launches. You say: "Find something else to occupy our time with while the MCC continues to be fixed." I have waited. I have waited for half a year. I defended them the first months. Shit happens. They'll fix it, and we'll be fine soon. Then, just the other day, I realized that I've been waiting for far too long, and the reality that the MCC most likely never will see that day where it's completely fixed dawned upon me. Believe me, we know that our shouts won't change shit. But if we, just for one moment, stay silent about it, we'll start forgetting. We'll forget how Microsoft made us pay 60 dollars for a broken product, and we'll then pay another 60 dollars for something that just might work. "Well yeah, it shouldn't have been, but it was, so we can't really go back in time and fix anything now can we?" You're right. We can't. That is exactly why we are shouting about it. If we can't fix it, then we most certainly can't forget about it. " "We have every right to complain" You do, but that doesn't mean we really need to hear about it, or believe that we should be treated like shit just because we're excited about the new installment in the franchise." You shouldn't be treated like shit for being excited by the new installment in the franchise. It's very hard to see the sad reality when it comes to something you love. I want to preorder and be overly excited about Halo 5 and buy the hell out of it on release. But I won't, because if I do, I know that I've let the big corporation win. They might earn a damned lot of money out of others, but at least I'll know that they didn't win me over. [SEP] Nobody is treating you like shit because you are excited about Halo 5. Just because they tell you that you shouldn't preorder it, it doesn't mean they're treating you like shit. They are just trying to protect us as consumers from being screwed by the big guys. They haven't let Microsoft win them over yet, and that's why they go against you. Because it's the only way to make you realize. And maybe, someday, we'll all realize what is happening. And once and for all, we will stand together, and say: No. Not again.
+>The issue is that perseveration doesn't only kick up when it's something you enjoy. You can perseverate with something you don't like in order to avoid something you don't like even more. (E.x. cleaning to avoid homework) > "Doesn't only" works both ways. The issue is finding ways to interrupt it when necessary. Perseveration, in ADHD, is usually triggered by things that stimulate a person past a specific threshold. Using anxiety to trigger perseveration in order to procrastinate... That's a different issue. I fail to see its relevance. >The other issue is that equating "avid" (very eager/wanting to do something very much) reader with perseveration makes it sound like reading is a choice. It isn't, because perseveration isn't a choice. Perseveration is literally doing something in excess, beyond what you actually want to do. That's not eagerness, it's compulsion and I don't think we should romanticize it. > You talk like you think you're a slave. "Oh noes! There isn't a choice!" That sentiment contains less truth than you believe. Knowing ADHD as I do now, diagnosed as an adult, all this information could have changed my life had I known it earlier, even without access to meds. In terms of Low Arousal Theory perseveration is triggered by things that stimulate us. Look at all the thing ADHD people do to self stim. From fidgeters to adrenaline junkies. They're all associated with increasing dopamine levels, which means that they aren't generally associated with discomfort. Time management is a skill. Knowing one's own ADHD is also a skill. Time management with ADHD is a very special skill (which I don't claim to have mastered, that would be a lie). Use alarms, e.g. the Pomodoro technique, or any other method available to interrupt perseveration. e.g. Do your reading where you know you will be interrupted if you can't afford to lose too much time to it.. Perseveration is. To use a saying I hate, "It is what it is." You can view it negatively and dwell on how much you hate it... or you can find advantages and learn to work with and around it. >Also, what do you mean we should be able to do "well" at something when we learn to like/enjoy it? It isn't necessarily a question of whether someone enjoys reading. I enjoy reading but I literally can't do it for an extended period of time unless I'm medicated/perseverating. Would that make me bad at reading? Medication raises your state closer to that arousal threshold. That's why you can (mildly?) perseverate and/or read easier on it. In this framework, maybe you don't love reading. Maybe you're like me with maths and have issues with it (not maths phobic, but some kind of hangup). Maybe you just don't enjoy it enough. (Enjoyment is also arousal, btw.) Have you never found anything you enjoyed reading enough to get lost in it? You do know that neurotypicals get lost in reading, film, and music too, right? Not usually as powerfully, but they do (and "neurotypical" isn't as well defined as people like to think it is). On meds, I have to take extra care. Sometimes it's "improved focus" and sometimes it's mild/low grade perseveration. And it can be a fine line between. I have alarms on my phone to warn me about break time, because I can become time blind with certain tasks. We also have to learn to keep the larger task in focus (and not get lost wikipedia surfing, for example). This is both easier and harder on meds. You seem to have a bias against ADHD symptoms and are determined to see them as negatives. You will never be able to separate yourself from ADHD; it had a hand in forming you. Without ADHD, you wouldn't recognise yourself. As contradictory as it may sound, you need to learn to accept yourself while bettering yourself. Civilisation has not existed very long, and modern society since the industrial revolution is is nothing compared to how long our species has been evolving. To automatically assume that the neuro-atypical is defective or "ill" is not logical. If you look at the epidemiology statistics for ADHD, we are too many to be a recent accident, it is genetic. We were not culled by evolution. That means we must have had advantages. Admittedly, they don't seem well suited to modern society, but you can only work with what you've got. Are you going to work with it, or are you going to resent it? Bitterness and anger as motivators can only carry you so far. And they rarely help one be a better person. [SEP] You have a choice about how you respond to it, and what you do with it.
+Honestly I just feel sorry for you. I wanna try and help, I could of laughed like "hahaha how pathetic is this and kept scrolling" (because people do that probably all the time) but I wanna try and just openly give some advice. If you wanna reject it in your bubble that's fine. , just message me or talk it here, no skin off my back. [SEP] But if you actually want advise on anything
+Let's cut this analogy even finer. If someone comes in with a wound infection, you don't simply start them on IV antibiotics. First, you examine the wound: is it purulent, traumatic, bleeding? Giving out hormones without a psychiatric evaluation is the equivalent of giving out antibiotics without examining the wound. Is she manic? Obsessive compulsive? Depressed? In the US, I guarantee the clinic she went to does not have a mental health professional on hand. There just are not enough to go around. So... My suspicion is that she showed up without a referral from the therapist and expected to recieve hormones off the bat. And... In an atypical presentation (gender dysphoria presenting at 19 is atypical), the doctor wasn't comfortable starting hormones yet. [SEP] She even mentioned in the replies that she could've started hormones there, but they were "rude."
+Notwithstanding that many many women will say that, in their experience, they are subject to comments that men are not. Anyway, you demanded studies Anderson and Leaper. 1998. “Meta-Analysis of Gender Effects on Conversational Inturruption: Who, What, When, Where, and Why.” Sex Roles 39(3-4):225-252. Farley, Ashcroft, Stasson, and Nusbaum. 2010. “”Nonverbal Reactions to Conversational Inturruptions: A Test of Complementary Theory and Status/Gender Parallel.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 34(4):193-206. Hancock and Rubin. 2015. “Influence of Communication Partner’s Gender on Language.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 34(1):46-64. Kollock, Blumstein, and Schwartz. 1985. “Sex and Power in Interaction: Conversational privileges and Duties. American Sociological Review 50(1):34-46 http http http [SEP] As far as I can tell, your argument is that a lot of men are just assholes to everyone, so women on the receiving end of condescension shouldnt think its specifically because they are women?
+It wouldn't be wrong to consider women inferior when comparing men and women side-by-side. But the reality of things is, we cannot compare men to women even though we are all a subset of the group humans. Instead, we must judge both genders to their respective standards. There are some qualities that are more pertinent in women than men, and likewise some more pertinent in men than women. [SEP] Hence, men and women need to be judged to two entirely different standards.
+That's such backwards thinking. That's like questioning how many rape allegations are false. Just because a handful are made up doesn't discredit the overwhelming majority. More importantly, [SEP] it doesn't discredit the actual problem of sexual harassment.
+I think there are two problems here: 1. IQ tests are a flawed measure of intelligence. These flaws range from practice effects, to cultural bias, to problems with statistical and theoretical modeling. An IQ difference of "15 points", or 1 standard deviation on one of the scales used to describe IQ, was used in the horribly racist book "The Bell Curve" to give fake validity to the claim that black people are less intelligent than white people. (Spoiler warning: They are not.) I have a feeling that your claim of a 15 point difference for a specific subgroup of Jews has similar problems to those of the book. Also: "Most" IQ test? Which ones? If it really is "most", many of them will use sometimes wildly differing methods of standardization, so "15" points is absolutely meaningless. For example, some tests use a mean of 50, and a standard deviation of 10, others use 100 and 15, or 100 and 10 - z standardization uses 0 and 1, respectively. I repeat: "15 points" is meaningless, even before going into the flaws of IQ models in general. 2. Where do most Nobel Prize winners come from? Do they really come from all over the world, or only from a select sample of industrialized nations, with the necessary facilities and education systems to even produce Nobel candidates? How big is the proportion of people with Jewish ancestry in these countries compared to the proportion of people with Jewish ancestry in this, more specific, population? How big is the proportion of people with Jewish ancestry in academia? In short: Your "statistics" have a terrible flaw: Selection bias. Source: Undergrad-level knowledge of Psychology and Statistics. [SEP] You need to intelligently select your sample and the population you want to draw conclusions from/compare it with to make any sense. The way you put it now, every impoverished inhabitant of a third-world country with no access to even basic education figures in on the "against" side of the argument, skewing your "results".
+I would like to clarify a few things, and I hope my clarifications generate no animosity between us. I consider myself a pretty open minded individual and I can see both sides of the argument. But I do feel you're dealing with some misinformation, and maybe some bias in your own statement. Maybe I'm wrong, and if so, I would like to be corrected. I hope we can have a friendly, and productive conversation - and perhaps we can both learn from it. Trump proposed banning further Muslim immigration, not banning Islam, as you seem to believe. Additionally, the ban it's about securing boarders, not about hate towards a group or race of people. He has obviously taken steps towards limiting other types of immigration as well, and the reasons for this are many. However, I feel that there is a stereotype towards Islam that has only been reinforced by recent attacks in Europe, and despite those responsible being part of a small minority, people are getting scared. It's natural for people to want to feel safe, and it's hard to feel secure in an airport when the last thing you heard on the news was a report of scores of people murdered in an airport. I have friends who were going to visit Brussels this month, but have canceled their plans. It is the same concept as your Disneyland example, but on a worldwide scale, and not hypothetical. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Islam is the inherent problem, there have been many instances throughout history where the teachings of a religion has been misinterpreted and led to bloodshed (Christianity, for example). But until that happens, until there is more positive than negative coverage of Islam, this trend of stereotyping will continue to slip forward, and probably result in some pretty bad situations. America will always be a place of free religion, as long as that religion doesn't inhibit the freedoms of others. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church is allowed to exist even though they represent a truly corrosive "religion" which blatantly harbor hate and use it for their own devices. In no way will the Islamic religion, at it's core, ever get close to this level of indecency. I don't see Islam or Muslims being banned from America. I don't feel that, in my town, there is excessive stereotyping against Muslims or Islam. A few notes on your "common factors": Not all terrorists are Muslim. [ http Not all terrorists are men. Being in the military, I've closely studied the tactics of terrorists and the use of woman is common, especially in war zones. [ http Many terrorists have not killed people. If you think that every misguided Islamic follower immediately meanders off to murder someone or a group of people you would be wrong. Terrorists are not on a lower level of intelligence, they aren't mindless killing zombies. Some comb the internet, searching for converts tot their cause. Some spread verbal terrorism (words that incite hate and violence). And some sit at home and silently cheer their comrades onward. Terrorism is a movement, "terrorist" is not a status that one gains on blowing themselves up in public. [SEP] But there is something off regarding the silence from the Islamic community, I feel that it would do a great deal of good if Americans saw a rising up of the peaceful majority of Islamic believers. A public outcry against the acts of violence, especially in countries where there are large Islamic communities would make a world of difference on the global outlook towards Islam as a religion.
+Did you read the rest of the post after that sentence where it’s explained how they’re only doing it to women, not other men? And how just about every trans person notices a huge difference in the amount of condescension they get when they transition to a different gender? You can tell it’s gender-based, not just regular condescension. [SEP] Women get condescension more than men BECAUSE they’re women.
+Meat industry reform is impossible given present demand, it will not happen. Reform also requires activism, most people don't particularly desire to be activists. We hope that one day enough people decide to eat plant products instead, and animal agriculture shrinks slowly. I don't know where you get this weird idea from that vegans feel so superior, or have some bizarre Utopian view of things. It's the same reason I abstain from plenty of stuff that I think is unethical, while still realizing that I'm not some saint who is single-handedly saving the world. Quick pedantic point: Being vegan really is cheap and easy once you get the hang of things, it's really not the expensive and difficult luxury non-vegans make it out to be, at least not for most. [SEP] We think animal agriculture is terrible, so we abstain from contributing to it in the way that most matters to all industry: monetarily.
+Right, but that's not a wedding. $90/plate for a full, multi-course dinner meal with attentive wait staff can be normal depending on the city you live in. you'd be surprised how astronomical shit can be. My wedding was under $3k but average weddings are $20k and it someone wants to spend that, it's their decision. [SEP] You'd know this if you ever tried to plan a wedding
+> Regarding your assertion that Siri's "understanding" is not the same as human understanding, of course it is not the same. They may not even be comparable. They are different systems completely. If you accept this then I don't see how you can assert people are overestimating the competence of humans when assessing AI when you acknowledge they are different systems and may not be comparable. I guess you believe that symbol manipulation without meaning is equivalent to symbol manipulation with meaning? > The fact that they are not the same is a non-sequitur, however, in that not being the same does not imply one has greater or lesser "understanding" than the other. Well I believe its clear that humans do have a greater understanding than Siri of communication and the symbols being manipulated. I guess where we disagree is you don't think its possible to claim that humans have a greater understanding of manipulating language symbols for meaning than Siri? Or maybe you are claiming that meaning doesn't matter in this case all that matters is symbol manipulation? [SEP] I already provided sources of a huge body of work across multiple disciplines from philosophy to linguistics to neuroscience that illustrate exactly why humans do indeed have much greater understanding than Siri does.
 You literally just posted a Washington Post link that contradicted the very narrative you thought you were pushing. Did you read the actual article? Your article claimed that people from Carrier felt abandoned by Trump. 95% of the article talked about how people FELT about what was happening to them. Then at the very bottom. THE VERY BOTTOM. Your own article pushing your narrative... Carrier saved 800 jobs (from what Trump claimed was originally 1,100) from going off-shores. This of course was after your smug/disrespectful reply you gave in which I told you I had already responded to this exact post in a previous thread. Please read the subreddit rules. "Post only in good faith". If you're gonna pedal fake news, can you at least like... actually review it? Please? Edit: Yeah so I just pulled this from the link you posted: "The Carrier deal itself prevented the plant from closing, but it didn’t stop the company from laying off about 500 of the 1,400 workers at the factory." Do you read ANY of these articles you post daily? [SEP] This of course was after your smug/disrespectful reply you gave in which I told you I had already responded to this exact post in a previous thread.?
 My input on this isn't really worth much, I live in Dubai so rent is insane here regardless the size. I live in a 1,100sq ft apartment and my rent is equivalent to about 1.9k CAD. 1 bedroom, open plan kitchen, hallway (dining area) and living room with 1.5 bathrooms. [SEP] my input on this isn't worth much
 > Yes, that's the point. It's a moronic argument, synonymous to your own. You invoked Godwin, therefore you lost the argument, by default. Move on moron. > Untrue, unless you have evidence to support it. This is a broad generalization, with NO factual evidence. Did I make a factual statement to be submitted to the Nobel prize committee? No I made an observation and said specifically "I suspect". This means I could be right or I could be wrong. If I am correct I don't give a fuck. If I am wrong, I equally don't give a fuck. The person here taking the biggest offense is you, who clearly give a ton of fuck. I suspect you are a fucking moron. This is evidence by your ignorant to the word "suspect" and your zealotry in over-analyzising a simple statement. > That's dishonest, and serves no purpose in an argument. What argument you moron? Go back and read the comments again, dickhead. I actually agreed with you that "atheism" has nothing to do with the initial argument. > Your observations are unimportant, unless you are studying something, and properly handle your observations. They are important to what I say. I'm studying the effect criticisms have towards atheist libertarians. I can observe that you are being a hissy moron. That's extremely important to my statement that you are a hissy moron. > Trying to get a free pass to say whatever baseless shit you want by hiding it beneath "opinion" is not going to fly. That's how opinions work son. Here is one example: In my opinion, you are a argumentative douchebag moron, who failed basic comprehension, and ignorant of the subtleties and nuance of the English language. [SEP] That's how opinions work son. Here is one example: In my opinion, you are a argumentative douchebag moron, who failed basic comprehension, and ignorant of the subtleties and nuance of the English language.
-The original comment in this chain was a broad and baseless strawman of feminism. OP of this whole post was correct in pointing this out and criticizing the fact that it was getting up voted. Sorry I didn't think this was so hard to understand. [SEP] Sorry I didn't think this was so hard to understand.
-> try new things and/or improve their favorite builds So we agree, adapt your build to the mechanic so you can play with it. The whole league mechanic is about controlling your build and your damage, if you can't do that with your build, tweak it so you can do it. But changing the way you were playing is harder than crying to force GGG changing the league mechanic. [SEP] But changing the way you were playing is harder than crying to force GGG changing the league mechanic.
-Culture: > http Ah, BreitBart, the world's #1 source for unbiased views. There's absolutely nothing in the article they write to support their theory that the police findings are inaccurate. > http Pretty tragic murder. Where's the evidence it - or the lack of a memorial - is related to 'culture' in any way? Laws/Justice System: > http From BreitBart to [British shock tabloids] ( http the parade of quality journalism keeps rolling on in. Actual journalistic outlets regularly [debunk the myth of no-go zones] ( http but hey, that doesn't move copy. > http Another tabloid, brilliant. Okay, the Mirror is actually quoting the Independent (though curiously not linking their story) so let's see what [they have to say] ( http - "There are believed to be dozens of Sharia “courts” operating in the UK. However, although they adjudicate on religious matters, they do not have the legal status of courts, acting more as councils or tribunals." So... they aren't actually part of the justice system at all. A problem, and definitely one that can't be tolerated, but as usual the Mirror pumps up the inflammatory part while diverging a wee bit from the reality of the situation. Maybe use the actual Independent piece itself? > http A reputable source, at last! So some nutjobs go around and tell people not to go to clubs and it's somehow part of the 'laws/justice system'? I guess it's only a problem when it's done in the name of Islam, since when it's done in the name of any other religion it's just quaint. > http A 'dozen men in orange safety vests' trumpeting their beliefs does not mean they're a part of the justice system. Maybe you should reconsider renaming this category to 'the views of a couple dozen people in Europe' instead of 'Laws/Justice System'. Education: > http From the article: - "It said immigrant children were 85 per cent accountable for a four-per-cent increase in the number of children failing to get good enough grades in the final years of school, according to AFP." Wow, four percent. What a catastrophe. It's almost as if refugees haven't had the opportunity to get a good education and you're judging the situation based upon a short-term problem. Exactly how is this an endemic or long-term problem? Come on. If you're going to harvest links to prove something try to have them a) all from actual reputable sources (3/4 out of 7 ain't a good ratio) and b) actually related to the headings you put them under (0/7 on this score, sadly). [SEP] Come on. If you're going to harvest links to prove something try to have them a) all from actual reputable sources (3/4 out of 7 ain't a good ratio) and b) actually related to the headings you put them under (0/7 on this score, sadly).
-It's her thread, but considering that none of the comments presented the experience of the other side, I felt the need to enlighten this girl. > So essentially, you have roughly the same amount of actual "options" in your inbox as a man does. People you find attractive physically and mentally who will respect you. I'm sorry but that's nonsense. I regularly hear girls complain about being flooded with messages, meanwhile most guys get crickets. I guess you can blame my pic if you want but I'm not breaking any mirrors over here lol, and my profile is just enough to indicate that I'm sophisticated. I don't even get views most of the time. I don't know what the gender ratio is on OkCupid but typically these dating sites have a lot more dudes. I know you personally can't do anything about the lameness of that reality but you could at least acknowledge that yes, dudes have a legitimate problem that only adds to the loneliness that made them go online in the first place. [SEP] considering that none of the comments presented the experience of the other side, I felt the need to enlighten this girl
-It's part of the job to chastise the story. Journalism is also about asking the things the people want to know. The journalist asked the questions I wanted to know, so she did a good job. [SEP] It's part of the job to chastise the story.
-Is it usual for squirrels to have black fur? - If so, mr kitty could have done a boo boo if it's a uncommon/rare sight in the species. - I know red squirrels are rare in UK, but don't know about this poor guy or squirrels elsewhere. :( Anyone know? Nonetheless, he seems to be quite the humble victor... Didn't think cats took on something as big as a squirrel without some nasty bites, hope the cat is okay though.. [SEP] I know red squirrels are rare in UK,
->Your plane anecdote is so absolutely irrelevant to the discussion and so utterly unrelatable to anything I said, if I really have to explain to you that what you are discussing here is a straw man, then I'm not the one who is trolling. How is linking to a NASA article creating a straw man argument? How is correcting you on the SR-71 relates to anything you said? I'm not going to waste my time reading the rest of your post (or your other posts. Why did you respond several times to my same post?). I posted to prove that SR-71 has other applications than military use, which I succeeded at. You're simply making no sense unless your goal is to try to bring me into some kind of argument you feel compelled to have for some odd reason. I am done feeding trolls today. If you want more information on the SR-71, the Wikipedia page is an excellent reading material. Here's a good video of it as well. Quite an engineering feat. [SEP] I am done feeding trolls today.
-There’s was obviously a problem that’s larger than she is saying, but that’s because unlike us, she wasn’t looking at chat the whole time. It was an issue that should’ve been handled better but there isn’t a reason to crucify her for it. She wasn’t instigating it at all and I’m sure if she saw how bad it was she would’ve done something about it. And let’s just be honest, overall people like to talk more about bad things than good things because it’s more interesting and fun. That being said in reality the stream was extremely enjoyable and fun, but the issues that occurred are being talked about far more. That’s just my thoughts. [SEP] It was an issue that should’ve been handled better but there isn’t a reason to crucify her for it.
-No most rape victims are not men, most rape victims in prisons are men. Also, the feminist movement is very concerned with ending all rape which you would know if you were informed on the movement. However I see MRAs bitch about how they are being oppressed for being told not to make rape jokes and I don't see them defending male rape victims in general. And no, the pay gap has to do with MEN AND WOMEN IN THE SAME POSITION WITH THE SAME EDUCATION where women are being payed less, stop making excuses. And I have seen the bullshit I mentioned about denying rape claims and saying women should be able to be hit so many fucking times. And no, the 'men's rights movement' is not a movement, it's strait cis white men bitching when they have no idea what oppression is really like. [SEP] Also, the feminist movement is very concerned with ending all rape which you would know if you were informed on the movement.
->It's a pity the sad character is also labelled as being fat, as that means that being fat is sad. Okay, how did this idiot get a psychology degree if she doesn't grasp basic logic? One fat character being sad ≠ every fat person is sad. [SEP] One fat character being sad ≠ every fat person is sad.
-> When Davies starts talking about "minority opinions", she instantly goes on the offensive, talking about how he's a "white anglo-saxon male", and is therefore not a minority. Its Phillip Davies, someone who doesn't think the committee should exist at all, and who associates with a group that has had a "lying woman of the month" section on their website. Its pretty obvious that she'd be defensive... And besides, its ridiculous that Davies has tried to get on this committee, he only intends to derail it. Like he's derailed everything else he has been involved in. As far as I know there are two other "white anglo-saxon" males on the committee already, so its not like she has anything against them being a part of the process. > she uses the term 'manspreading' unironically When has she done that? > she talks about the gender pay gap in terms of sexism, and actually seems to think it can be fixed through legislation. Where has she spoken about the gender pay gap in terms of sexism? What legislation is she proposing? [SEP] When has she done that?
-> No, it's not a leading question. I pointed out, "Here's what it looks like what you're doing. Do you really think...that's going to play?" And I said that's not what I am doing. But for some reason you decided to ignore that. > THAT was simple! Why did you dance around it forever and insist on not answering it? Because I rejected your framing and you took that as some kind of dodge instead reading that I clarified my positions several times. > What question do you have for me? How is throwing out the AGG deal and changing R5 to allow some flexibility "doing whatever I want"? Are any of these changes unreasonable? [SEP] How is throwing out the AGG deal and changing R5 to allow some flexibility "doing whatever I want"? Are any of these changes unreasonable?
-I mean, if you think any of the comments I made break the rules aside from the one where I called him a "specimen" (understandable enough) then I'm not sure how you haven't been just as bad in that regard. You literally stroll up like a police officer trying to meet his quota smacking his baton in hand going "any of you fine folks lookin' to spend tonight in a cell?" Like, geeze dude. I was an inch too snide, I get that. But if you can look at how you've handled the situation and say you haven't at least met that level of condescension, then I don't think you're being honest. Maybe I'm caring too much about this, but if me thinking you're out of line is enough to get me banned then you're only proving my points. [SEP] But if you can look at how you've handled the situation and say you haven't at least met that level of condescension, then I don't think you're being honest.
-Oh boy, the excessive wordiness comes back. Lets go piece by piece >Cool, so we're using circular logic like the religious fundamentalists now. I hope you are not still asserting that you have thought critically about any of this. If my entire statement had ended there you would be correct, but then I went on to spell out exactly why I believe this alleged chain of events is absurd. >You completely ignored the quoted statement from the Department of Defense about how they would involve as few people as possible in a false flag attack for deniability. That's how there would be no leaks, >because it was not documented or involved nearly as much as all the content we're seeing leaked by current whistleblowers, which was communicated in great detail across agencies. You've completely ignored >this, as pseudoscientists do with evidence that contradicts their bullshit theories. I ignored it because it more or less doesn't matter. Yeah, of course they would involve as few people as possible in it but how many people do you really think that they are going to be able to do this with 3 guys in a truck? That they would dupe not only the entire American nation but all the international ones as well? That nations such as Russia and Iran would not call us out on it? Strange that the anthro guy is trying to lecture the person with a degree in science on what pseudoscience is but you get all sorts. >If anything, the false equivalence is coming from you purporting that the information released by whistleblowers has to be related to 9/11 to prove the existence of any false flag operations. Once again you >are trying to argue that the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence. Please stop relying so heavily on the appeal to ignorance. It is a documented fallacy and illustrates poor reasoning skills. What I am arguing is that the overwhelming body of evidence that we have - in particular this thing called the 9/11 commission report - contradicts that this was some kind of false flag operation. Thats the body of evidence that I rely on, care to share what you may have that contradicts this? >I didn't grasp at straws by questioning your (still unsupported by any evidence whatsoever) claim that the government would not kill or allow a lot of its own citizens to die to further its goals, and I used >historical evidence to contradict it. You are conducting strawman arguments with yourself. Nobody said they orchestrated 9/11. People are claiming they MAY have allowed it to happen. It's not the same >thing. You have asserted that they wouldn't do that. I clearly illustrated a time when the government was not only was okay with killing many people, but intentionally did so to more than three times the >amount of victims of 9/11. That's not a false equivalence. It is a direct contradiction of your absolutist statements about what is absurd. So people are essentially making claims that they might have sort of allowed it to happen, or something, and that is thinking critically. Got it. >Patriot Act Things Cool. If they have all this power, why do 9/11. Why not just pass the legislation >Besides being able to legally seize absolute power and control, they also gained billions of dollars in military contracts through the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The only thing absurd here is that you are so >dismissive about the pragmatic reasons a government would engage in wars. Who is they. Are all of "them" in on the false flag? This kind of widens the small number of people you are referring to in the DoD quote right? Im not going to deny that people made some serious money off the "War on Terror" but how does this relate back to it being more plausible that it is some kind of false flag operation rather than plain old incompetence of a alphabet soup of intelligence agencies that colossaly dropped the ball dealing with a part of the world that we understood so poorly before 9/11? >First of all what does being a backwater nation have anything to do with the invasions or covert influencing of governments? Because if you are going to invade a nation for gain, why pick one that exports basically Heroin? Why invade a country that was firmly in the orbit of our regional ally Pakistan? Why not just ask the ISI if we wanted something? > Have you heard of Somalia, Libya, Vietnam, Korea, Guatemala, or any of the other countries that are/were considered poor backwater nations? Why did we either directly invade or send CIA agents to stage >coups in these regions? What a ridiculous list of random countries thrown together 1. Are we talking like 93 Somalia? The UN Op to establish enough stability to try and stop genocide? 2. Libya - the bombing campaigns lead by the UK/France to try and get control of a situation across the Med from them? Also UN operation 3. Vietnam - Misguided application of domino theory. Here is an actual example of your false flag btw. One we know all about btw, unlike this ultra secret 9/11 one 4. Korea - We invaded to stop the hostile communist takeover of the Western partition, during a particularly dark era of the Cold War. 5. Guatemala - Because United Fruit company was butthurt about not making a killing anymore. Again, we know all about it. So why Afghanistan? Why pin it on a nation that gains us literally nothing? Its landlocked so we have to route all of our logistics via Pakistan or Russia, two nations that we are not always on the best of terms with. Again, why not make it Iraqis? seems like a two birds with one stone type of deal, if we have the capability to complete a false flag operation with not a soul finding out about it would be pretty simple to extend it to make the hijackers Republican Guard or something. Hell, why not mount another False Flag to plant those WMDs we claimed were there? >Furthermore Afghanistan is not just some backwater nation, it is a mineral rich region. As a 2010 New York Times article pointed out, "the vast scale of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was [recently] >discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists.” >If you can't comprehend the benefits of wanting access to those resources then you have literally no place debating military intervention, whatsoever. Except that we have known about those since roughly the 70s, as have many other powers but the logistics involved have always been to great to make it worth it. http So take a deep breath and really think about this. Which is more plausible - the false flag "evidence of absence" stuff, or the enormous body of evidence that points the other way? [SEP] Strange that the anthro guy is trying to lecture the person with a degree in science on what pseudoscience is but you get all sorts.
-I didn't think that I'd have to explain the most basic underpinnings of trademark law, but judging by your reliance on the completely inapposite WWP, I guess I do. "A trade-mark only gives the right to prohibit the use of it so far as to protect the owner's good will against the sale of another's product as his." Prestonettes, Inc. v. Cody, 264 U.S. 339, 368 (1924). In other words, "[t]he Lanham Act seeks to prevent consumer confusion that enables a seller to pass off his goods as the goods of another.... [T]rademark infringement protects only against mistaken purchasing decisions and not against confusion generally." Lang v. Ret. Living Publ'g Co., 949 F.2d 576, 582-83 (2d Cir. 1991). In WWP, this clearly occurred--one veteran's aid website used a nearly identical name as the other to co-opt goodwill, boosting its own donations at the expense of Wounded Warrior Project's. Here, there's no chance that a website called comcastroturf.com, and whose entire purpose of the website is not to solicit donations, but to name-check against the FCC database, would be confused with a company that provides telecom services. Nowhere on the comcastroturf.com website does the word "donate," "contribute" or anything similar even appear--you have to click through to fightforthefuture.com logo, de-emphasized at the very bottom of the page, and then click through 2 more times to start the donation process. That is not trademark infringement. By the time you get to the Fight for the Future website and click through again, there is no possibility of confusion that the user would be receiving Comcast services. Even if you're talking about a trademark dilution claim, this website would still be outside of the scope. In order to be considered "commercial speech," and thus outside of the noncommercial defense to trademark dilution, the speech must "do no more than propose a commercial transaction." Here, none of the speech on the website even proposes a commercial transaction. The website has you look to see if your name has been falsely used as a commenter on an FCC APA notice and comment procedure. At minimum, that "does more than propose a commercial transaction." You sound like you're still in law school. Creative issue spotting, but you should always make sure that you're based in the fundamental tenets of the law before you advance a creative argument. [SEP] In WWP, this clearly occurred--one veteran's aid website used a nearly identical name as the other to co-opt goodwill, boosting its own donations at the expense of Wounded Warrior Project's
-I would never give the "thumb's up". But I do like the runner's "up nod", where you make eye contact for 1/16th of a second and then nod your head up. If I'm feeling good I give the "smile & wave" where I smile, and slightly raise one open hand. I have to be careful because, while running, my smile looks very creepy and my arm gesture looks like I am requesting medical attention. (Which I am requesting -- everything hurts and I'm dying.) [SEP] I would never give the "thumb's up
-you know that electoral college votes are determined by the outcome of the popular vote in most states right? this is why only a few blue counties determine the election results of NY being blue every single election second, as you pointed out, looking at results by county is kind of weird... you need to go by districts. Again, on the presidential and governership levels that is pointless to talk about. The only place where that matters is purple counties for house and senate seats. Remeber though, district lines can always just be redrawn, which is why purple districts only matter for a short period of time, you can jerry mander the most purple state in the union, florida, to have a house composition that is 65.8% republican voting share and a senate with 65% republican voting share. [SEP] you know that electoral college votes are determined by the outcome of the popular vote in most states right?
-Unless, of course, you are attracted to people you can properly reproduce with, in which, in this day and age, that can very much be an impossibility with trans people. There are some trans people with their original genitalia and the ability to reproduce but many don't want to go through that because of the dysphoria (especially female to male). Some people's sexual attraction will, in fact, boil down to the very core reason sex exists, and while not everyone wants that it can be a deal breaker for many if that won't happen. I hate to say it (being genderfluid myself and therefore dealing with what dysphoria can do), but sometimes there are limitations and sexual differences (especially pre and in-transition) that many will not be attracted to unless that specifically is something they can be attracted to. It's exactly the same as those who aren't racist but just aren't attracted to certain races that way. To say one is transphobic because they aren't attracted to trans people is just like saying you're homophobic because you aren't attracted to the opposite gender or saying you're racist because you aren't attracted to lighter skin. Sexual attraction does not work that way. I'm sorry. Edit: typo [SEP] Unless, of course, you are attracted to people you can properly reproduce with
-My wife asks, "When did Tumblr spill into Reddit?" But seriously, it wasn't about misogyny, it was about that not being a default in 1996. They made a vague story about a boy going on a journey and didn't realize they'd need to give you a choice of avatar. [SEP] But seriously, it wasn't about misogyny,
-> We get an introduction to two more Seraphs and a Dragon, who we know absolutely nothing about Uh, I guess that's what introductions are supposed to be for? >yet Sorey acts like he's known these guys for years The only reason why you would feel that way is because he calls them by their names. Given that the characters don't have surnames, it makes it feel like Sorey is acting too familiar with the bunch by calling their first names (which is the only name they got). >wants to purify the Dragon like it was his own little brother. That's what his personality is like. Sorry, not sorry. That's the truth. It's also because it's his job as the Shepherd. He isn't totally irrelevant to the situation. It's his damn role to purify malevolence from creatures the moment he chose to be the Shepherd. If he can find a way to purify a Dragon, why wouldn't he? You're just condemning a guy who wants to do a better job at his...job? Seriously? >but as an anime-only viewer it was really boring watching him fight - his reason to fight didn't mean anything to me because I just met these characters. That has absolutely nothing to do with being an "anime-only viewer" or not. It just means you hate those type of characters and can't identify with passionate characters that likes to help out strangers. It means just that. Nothing to do with whether you played the game or not. >How am I supposed to care/feel for the loss of her brother if she herself doesn't look like she gives a shit? I don't know. Then don't care? I mean, you just dislike the monotone characters. Plenty of people real life are like that (I'm pretty sure you discriminate against them). Expressions aren't the only to way to show emotion. If you're the type that dislikes people who don't express their emotions on their faces, then I hope that you stay away from people like that in real life. Your judgmental attitude only helps to make people feel bad. Nothing more. >And that's not the only time her actions seemed conflicting So you're saying that her showing a monotone expression is conflicting with her care for her brother? What? Expressions don't conflict emotions. Jesus Christ. >she berated Sorey at least three times when he touched her (mostly because he was trying to save her from something), yet at the end she goes herself and touches his cheek. How does her personality change that fast? She berated Sorey for touching her for too long. Did you not notice what words she used? She constantly uses "when" which is a word associated with time. This doesn't conflict with her touching his cheek at all. She wasn't even touching him for a long time. Oh, and even if she does, it still isn't a contradiction. There are people who aren't comfortable with others initiating physical contact with them, but are comfortable with themselves initiating physical contact with others. This is not a contradiction, but a normal human quality. Her personality did not change in a split second. She is just displaying different aspects of her personality. Do you think of people as one-dimensional creatures? >Am I supposed to not question this just because "Oh, well Sorey is going to save her brother, so yeah she's lightened up". No, and you need to stop blaming the anime. No one is saying you aren't supposed to question shit. Victimizing yourself to make a point is a shit way to argue. Not a single damn person took away your freedom of speech. The fact you are posting this ridiculous post on reddit proves that you can question anything you want, even if it's something shitty. >More like "this is just fanservice to make people who've somehow self-inserted into Sorey feel good that they got someone who was previously cold to open up to them" So you hate a fictional character so badly that you feel the need to twist Sorey's character as some sort of ego-boosting tool for insecure people? Seriously? Holy shit. >which makes sense from a video game perspective since you are supposed to be Sorey (at least I assume you are) Oh jeez, I wonder why ToZ players find the game to pale in comparison with other Tale games. I mean, they can self-insert themselves into Sorey and boost their ego by going on a journey and opening up the hearts of a bunch of people. Totally for people with no friends who wants to pretend to have friends. I have no idea why ToZ players even complain about the game's narrative when Sorey's character makes perfect sense from a video game perspective. /s >And then Mr. Fango AKA Zaveid starts talking about how he drank and fought together with Mr. Dragon, like am I supposed to care more? I'd rather be shown, not told, all this stuff. Because it makes perfect sense in the narrative? He's trying to talk his bro/rival out of it after all. Should he just silently shoot Eizen while flashbacking the hell back to their times. Also, not everything needs to be shown. Some people just take "show, not tell" to the extreme and complain about every little exposition. You actually need to balance it out to make the narrative compelling. >I understand there are time limitations, but with two random episodes in between that only advertised some other game, and with this show supposedly being split-cour (not sure if this is true) This I agree with. There are time limitations, and that could hinder the story pacing. As of now, I'm not sure how to feel about the Berseria episodes at all. I definitely hope that it becomes relevant in the next cour (which is definitely happening because they haven't even introduced all the characters yet by EP8) so that the payoff will be great. >I think they could've built these characters up better so that I could actually feel their emotions. This is like the first episode that you get to know Zaveid and Edna. I don't know how much "better" you want. Also, not being able to empathize with the characters doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad writing. It could be or not be bad writing. In this case, it's not (because we haven't even got to know them long enough to judge that aspect just yet) and it's just that you don't like these character archetypes. You don't identify with them. That's just a clash of personality. Stop blaming the anime when there is nothing concrete to prove your point. >All the characters are generic as hell, and really, the only reason I've watched up to this point is because it looks visually appealing and the OP/ED are good. They are generic, but that doesn't make them bad characters. It still doesn't prove your point. You should seriously just say "I personally don't identify with these characters, and it's a bit difficult for me to keep on watching" instead of throwing around accusations and saying how the anime alienates "anime-only" viewers. I feel pity for you that you hate an anime so much that you think it is deliberately alienating and antagonizing you, AND all the "anime-only viewers" that you DON'T represent. I'm one of the "anime-only viewer" who knows about the game, but never bothered to play it. I've known the Tales franchise for years, but I wasn't interested in watching Zestiria (because of a recent lack of interest in the series). I watched it because a friend of mine was hyped for it, and now I'm enjoying it a lot. I guess the only reason why I, an "anime-only viewer", would enjoy watching this is because I self-insert myself into Sorey and feel good about myself? [Insert Pepe FeelsBadMan.png] Also, the anime is definitely flawed. It's not perfect by any means. However, everything that you have listed has to do with your personality more than it has to do with the anime. I'll list some things that are actual flaws for you: - Not a huge amount of "animating". Due to the focus on the visuals, the characters themselves are barely animated. More than often, you would see characters being static images when not engaging in a fight. It's extremely apparent in CGI scenes where some characters would just stand and do nothing. It's not because the characters are meant to do nothing, but simply because Ufotable don't bother animating background characters. - Uninteresting directing. This is purely subjective. However, I would personally say it is a flaw when compared to the likes of JoJo Part 4. It also has to do with the fact that there isn't much movement (less animating). Movement, sound (effects, voice acting, music), visuals (background, transitions, visual tricks), and focus is important in creating different kinds of moods. Zestiria doesn't have much visual tricks compared to JoJo Part 4 (which would do something like changing the colors of the scene, or overlaying scenes together like some manga panels). This is largely due to the fact that Zestiria's backgrounds are extremely detailed, making it hard to do visual tricks with it. Simply changing the color saturation would look bad, but recoloring entire backgrounds would also take a long time. That, and the director probably don't have much experience with doing those kind of things. So it's mostly just characters being animated with a static background in the back (which is often animated with CGI to make it look less static, but it creates lag because CGI has a high frame rate. That's why when CGI is used, the anime characters are lagging when moving (they are being animated with less frames than CGI). That's probably it I guess. There would probably be more things to say, but I don't want to delve into it too much. tl;dr - You are taking things too personally, and thinking that the anime is specifically alienating you + a certain group of people. However, the majority of your complaints have to do with you simply not being able to empathize with those characters. It would be best if you could make reasonable points next time. Then again a rant is defined as "to complain in a way that is unreasonable" so I guess you aren't wrong...technically. [SEP] That's what his personality is like. Sorry, not sorry. That's the truth. It's also because it's his job as the Shepherd. He isn't totally irrelevant to the situation. It's his damn role to purify malevolence from creatures the moment he chose to be the Shepherd. If he can find a way to purify a Dragon, why wouldn't he?
-There is always a good lump of high school age kids who think that they've had some liberating epiphany once they decide they don't believe in God. Like they're clever for having even considered it. Most Catholics I know were raised Catholic and have a pretty private expression of their faith. Also, a fair amount of the literal interpretations of violence and sexism you're referencing are not relevant to my faith, if that means anything to you. >The non-religious are considerably less associated with Stalin than Catholics are with any really bad former pope you could point to. Non Germans are considerably more associated with Hitler than Buddhists are with the Dalai Lama. I wouldn't automatically assume Germans today agree with what Hitler did, though they identify as German citizens in a nation that was not founded by Hitler History of blatantly prescribed violence by Christianity pales pretty heavily compared to the historic and present actions of radical Islam. When people point the finger at Jihad, they are mostly confronted with the idea that Christians have tarnished history with the crusades. Which is true; the crusades were unforgivable (most Christians agree), but they don't really stack up compared to the history of Jihad. And comparing violence and oppression perpetrated by Catholics today to Islamic extremism would be a stretch. That info is already readily available for you. Here is a pretty comprehensive explanation of violence justified by Christians and Muslims throughout history. Take a look if you like, but I don't expect you to. Again though, most Muslim's I know at least are also pretty down with tenets of peace and love. EDIT: Also, Christians believe the arbiter of how to properly follow God is Christ. That was kind of his whole deal. I'm surprised you asked me that question. EDIT again: I am not a regular visitor of the website to which I linked you. It seems a little wacko. I just Googled the video and that's where it brought me--I'm sure a lot of people with anti-Muslim agendas love it. I am not one of those people. [SEP] high school age kids
-You seem convinced that you know my idealolgy because I enjoy a shit posting sub with memes. Also my husband is an underpaid federal employee so we're fine wrt healthcare (which is why he's not an overpaid contractor). I'd like to see the benefits we enjoy extended to all. But that doesn't change the fact that he will likely die far too young. I'm surprised you find it tragic, you already seem to believe I deserve both that and death without knowing much about me aside from one aspect of my Internet life. Serious question: how do you think you'll get the average American on board with your view when you cloak yourself in layers of irony, sarcasm, shit posting, and cruelty when someone just shows up and says, "Hey, I'm a person, we want most of the same things, let's have a conversation?" Because irony will not protect you from what's actually coming. [SEP] Serious question: how do you think you'll get the average American on board with your view when you cloak yourself in layers of irony, sarcasm, shit posting, and cruelty when someone just shows up and says, "Hey, I'm a person, we want most of the same things, let's have a conversation?"
-Please dont. Look i know what you are going through and i wish i could just disappear but there are alot of things you are capable of and it people actually give a shit about you and wouldn’t like hearing you dead, not even me. It would be wrong for me to say that it gets better because it isn’t getting better for me but you can always go back, start over and fix your life. [SEP] Look i know what you are going through
-> It's the gender-politics version of the black celebrity claiming "Slavery's been over for a century and a half. Stop blaming white people and pull up your pants!" See, e.g., Bill Cosby and Morgan Freeman, whose balls are routinely spit-shined by a horde of 20-something white males. So, you mean, the truth? > In other words, I'm skeptical of the temptation to give cover to misogyny, or, at the very least, the moral indifference to the misogyny of others. Well, there's your problem. You've already started from the emotional assumption that misogyny is a big problem. So when confronted with actual rational evidence that it's not what you think it is, your emotional center becomes defensive: no, no, I believe this, so this contradicting evidence must be discountable! Now if you had solid reasoning for your beliefs about misogyny, you would not be so defensive; any evidence these new videos provide would simply be integrated with what you already know, allowing you to accept their reality and modifying your ideas about misogyny if need be. But instead of constructing a rational basis for believing what misogyny is, its causes, and proper solutions, you instead only know that it's a problem, and solutions are what "activists" tell you are the solutions. [SEP] You've already started from the emotional assumption that misogyny is a big problem.
-Since you have clearly ousted me as an RP supporter I will shed some light on why I will vote for Ron Paul: I am sick of voting for one of two parties that both work toward the same goals while espousing their "differences". I don't have the need to bash him on his creationism, because we live in a country where religious freedom should be upheld. He should be free to believe what he wants, and as long as he doesn't try to push his views on me we will always be square. Saying he has no answers aside from "down with government" is EXACTLY like saying Obama/Romney/InsertFacelessCarSalesmanPoliticianHere has no answers aside from "let the federal government sort it out, sure it will get mired in bureaucracy, but they will figure something out eventually that every single citizen in the country will approve of ". Well to hell with that, the fed hasn't done anything productive in years. They spend a majority of their time quibbling with, and stonewalling each other in some attempt to remain relevant. They should be upholding the law, not perverting it as a means to reach their own ends. How can you be so naive as to think that our federal government has your best interests at heart, or that they are protecting your freedom? Just this year we have seen more attacks on civil rights, personal freedom, and privacy than we have seen the government allot new rights to any group in a decade. In fact in the past 3 years it has become even HARDER for states to work with each other. Working in an insurance industry I can tell you, it has been no picnic. As to your last paragraph, I won't even rebut, because it is too close to call. Drinking the MSM/AP kool-aid and throwing your hands up in the air and resigning yourself to letting a man who hasn't proved his worth to the country in any quantifiable terms have a second term seems as if it borders on apathy. I respect you for having an articulate opinion, but I kindly disagree. I will vote for Ron Paul because he doesn't pander to whatever audience he found himself scheduled to be in front of, he sticks to his guns. I dream at night of him, sitting behind a no-frills desk, vetoing insane bills with a 8¢ Bic pen. THAT is leadership. Obama signed the NDAA with "extreme reservations" knowing full well what it entailed. A good man does what is right, ESPECIALLY when it is unpopular. [SEP] Drinking the MSM/AP kool-aid and throwing your hands up in the air and resigning yourself to letting a man who hasn't proved his worth to the country in any quantifiable terms have a second term seems as if it borders on apathy.
->You got any sources for that 40% number? If your google is broken, here you go: http >And that's what's wrong with our country. People like you who affirm that your fellow Americans who disagree or vote differently than you are an "evil" that must be destroyed. You could not have more perfectly exemplified my reasoning that hardcore Reps and hardcore Dems are so similar, just two sides of the same coin tearing this country apart. So thanks for that, I guess. If you think that's what's wrong with this country, then your head is up your ass. Our entire economy was razed to the ground in the last decade, it's illegal to talk about rising sea levels on the North Carolina senate floor, we're wasting billions of dollars on military activities that make our country less secure, and you're complaining about political divisiveness. Yeah... I'm sure if we stopped this "us vs them mentality," then our economy would fix itself, our energy crisis would be over, income inequality would disappear, healthcare and education would become affordable, world peace would be realized, and cancer eradicated. Right. But hey, if you'd like to live your life as a typical reddit neckbeard, and say things like "both parties suck, so I'm not voting for either of them," go ahead. It's definitely easier than using your brain. [SEP] But hey, if you'd like to live your life as a typical reddit neckbeard, and say things like "both parties suck, so I'm not voting for either of them," go ahead. It's definitely easier than using your brain.
-The only word that could be classified as "difficult" is cul-de-sac. Even then, how fucking lazy must you be not to google it. By the way, this reddit culture of TL:DRs and ELI5s etc. is annoying me. Redditors are spoiled, expect to digest information quickly and without any actual brain use. You dont check if the facts are true and believe the guy that explains it most simply. Which just makes it easierfor anyone to mislead you. I mean, how many times a day is the first comment on a TIL a rectifying one? If you expect to get smarter without actually reading what you call "walls of text," you'll be dumb your whole life. [SEP] By the way, this reddit culture of TL:DRs and ELI5s etc. is annoying me
-> WTF? Did you seriously just claim that my friends are terrorists? No. But you can convince them, they can convince others. Start a riot or two. That would be great. It is my true belief that if the Palestinians will set the example and show their love of peace, the Israelis will follow. > Not when you backtrack on it because your community has turned on you. What community? [SEP] No. But you can convince them, they can convince others. Start a riot or two. That would be great. It is my true belief that if the Palestinians will set the example and show their love of peace, the Israelis will follow.
-Actually I do have statistics, though its pretty common knowledge... http or do i need to post 100 similar sites? I usually don't bother to provide statistics that are known to anyone with a knowledge level high enough to add anything interesting to a topic. Usually, I use someone disputing widely known facts as someone not worth the time to discuss the issues with. On that note, have a nice day. [SEP] I usually don't bother to provide statistics that are known to anyone with a knowledge level high enough to add anything interesting to a topic.
->It doesn't really seem that way, but I'll take your word for it. I am sometimes overly bold in my debates, and so I sometimes give a disclaimer to show it isn't personal, and I'm not attacking you or your suffering, but the ideas that you are giving. >"The core Christian teachings are inherently harmful to a gay person. I wasn't yelled at by anyone or bullied. I was made to feel worthless because that is what Christianity teaches: humans are wretched and sinful, unworthy of redemption. Toss in the fact that Christian's positions on gay people are pretty well known and clear, and you have anything but "love" being tossed around." >So, I disagree with your statement about an idea not being able to kill. Thousands and thousands of dead gay kids would probably disagree too...if they were still here and had a voice. So that proves my point. You were being taught by people that you were unworthy and basically a piece of crap (that's what I'm getting from what you were saying), and your reaction to this was to kill yourself. Who tried to kill you? Yourself. You are a person, correct? What gave you the push to do that? Well, according to psychologists, yourself again. But for the sake of argument, let's say it was the idea that you are worthless and unacceptable in life. But where did that idea come from? A person. I don't know if that person was someone close to you, or a preacher, or a youth leader, or someone else. But it was a person. They pushed you to do that, either directly or indirectly. And there's something else you must understand about Christian teachings and the Bible. The Bible does say that homosexual acts are a sin, yes. But the Bible also says that lying is a sin. So who has ever told a lie? I certainly have, I would be lying if I said I never did. I'm about 99.99% certain that everyone has told one at one point or another. So lying is a sin, and so is homosexual acts. Great, now we've established that: I am inferring from what you said that Homosexuals are not accepted by Christians, and thus not accepted within churches. Please correct me if I am wrong for inferring that. But if that is true, does it not follow that anyone who lies is not accepted into Christian churches? Or anyone who is a prostitute, or people who are jealous over something, or anyone who has ever stolen anything (which is probably just about everyone again, even if it was something small)? If this were the case, then churches would be empty. I'm not sure what denomination of Christianity you came across, but they are wrong and probably hypocrites. If they can tolerate liars in their church, then they can tolerate homosexuals. And that's what my church does. We don't teach that homosexuals are sub-human, or wretched and sinful, no. We teach that they are human, and have the rights to salvation just like the liar does. The point isn't that humans don't deserve salvation, the point is that we don't deserve it but we receive it anyway, thanks to the mercy of God. And, a source for this - Matthew 21:31, Jesus himself speaking: "Which of the two obeyed his father?" They replied, "The first." Then Jesus explained his meaning: "I tell you the truth, corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the Kingdom of God before you do. [SEP] We teach that they are human, and have the rights to salvation just like the liar does.
-> she had many issues that made her look shady as fuck. Well, Trump was shady as hell and it sure as heck didn't seem to hurt him in the end, so... The difference in standards between her and Trump for some voters will forever be a mystery to me. [SEP] The difference in standards between her and Trump for some voters will forever be a mystery to me.
-What argument are you making exactly? It may not be a way of giving concrete instructions, but saying that treating Love as god I think is fairly in line with the whole "do unto others as you'd have done unto yourself," thing. But yea, I can understand how people would then just abstract "love" as much as they've abstracted god already; god is what people want him to be, and so too would love become. Anyways, I wasn't using it as an argument to or not to believe in something or anything; it was kinda just a statement. I can feel love in the universe without having to attribute it to god, and I feel sorry for those who can't. [SEP] and I feel sorry for those who can't.
-So maintaining an elaborate lie when you could have said nothing at all is.... the smart route to take here? Mmmkay. > than to tell them to fuck off. No one said anything about being vulgar nor rude, and it's your own short sight speaking more than anything. How about "I'm not comfortable answering that question" or "I'd rather not talk about it"? But of course rude people assume everyone else is rude. Projecting much? SA has an article up right now about SDs that employ SBs. I don't see the issue if that's something someone wants to do. Why don't you stop telling people how to manage their work life balance and focus on your own :) Just an idea. >Please get off your arrogant high horse because Google is a thing now in 2016 last time I checked, people can find out pretty much anything with a click of a button. Lmfao shut the entire fuck up. First of all you don't know me and I sure don't know you, so chill with the character assassination & go sort out your displaced aggression. I don't know what you think you're accomplishing by attempting to insult me- meanwhile I'm just going on with my day unbothered. You need to go sort your problems out with the source of those problems instead of taking them out on ppl in the reddit comments, k? Meanwhile I just googled my research assistantship and ta-da! It's not online!! Why? The internet isn't magically keeping tabs on every event of my life -.- So I re-iterate, shut the entire fuck up. The only issue is if your state records your employment, but google? Lmao oh really. Let me know how that goes for you. [SEP] Lmfao shut the entire fuck up. First of all you don't know me and I sure don't know you, so chill with the character assassination & go sort out your displaced aggression.
-Not eveyrone likes wasting their hard earned ammo and bandages on zombie and wildlife. People like you need to go to a PVE server so you can have fun fighting zombies/wildlife all day while the rest of us fight like real men on PVP [SEP] while the rest of us fight like real men on PVP
+The original comment in this chain was a broad and baseless strawman of feminism. OP of this whole post was correct in pointing this out and criticizing the fact that it was getting up voted. [SEP] Sorry I didn't think this was so hard to understand.
+> try new things and/or improve their favorite builds So we agree, adapt your build to the mechanic so you can play with it. The whole league mechanic is about controlling your build and your damage, if you can't do that with your build, tweak it so you can do it. [SEP] But changing the way you were playing is harder than crying to force GGG changing the league mechanic.
+Culture: > http Ah, BreitBart, the world's #1 source for unbiased views. There's absolutely nothing in the article they write to support their theory that the police findings are inaccurate. > http Pretty tragic murder. Where's the evidence it - or the lack of a memorial - is related to 'culture' in any way? Laws/Justice System: > http From BreitBart to [British shock tabloids] ( http the parade of quality journalism keeps rolling on in. Actual journalistic outlets regularly [debunk the myth of no-go zones] ( http but hey, that doesn't move copy. > http Another tabloid, brilliant. Okay, the Mirror is actually quoting the Independent (though curiously not linking their story) so let's see what [they have to say] ( http - "There are believed to be dozens of Sharia “courts” operating in the UK. However, although they adjudicate on religious matters, they do not have the legal status of courts, acting more as councils or tribunals." So... they aren't actually part of the justice system at all. A problem, and definitely one that can't be tolerated, but as usual the Mirror pumps up the inflammatory part while diverging a wee bit from the reality of the situation. Maybe use the actual Independent piece itself? > http A reputable source, at last! So some nutjobs go around and tell people not to go to clubs and it's somehow part of the 'laws/justice system'? I guess it's only a problem when it's done in the name of Islam, since when it's done in the name of any other religion it's just quaint. > http A 'dozen men in orange safety vests' trumpeting their beliefs does not mean they're a part of the justice system. Maybe you should reconsider renaming this category to 'the views of a couple dozen people in Europe' instead of 'Laws/Justice System'. Education: > http From the article: - "It said immigrant children were 85 per cent accountable for a four-per-cent increase in the number of children failing to get good enough grades in the final years of school, according to AFP." Wow, four percent. What a catastrophe. It's almost as if refugees haven't had the opportunity to get a good education and you're judging the situation based upon a short-term problem. Exactly how is this an endemic or long-term problem? [SEP] Come on. If you're going to harvest links to prove something try to have them a) all from actual reputable sources (3/4 out of 7 ain't a good ratio) and b) actually related to the headings you put them under (0/7 on this score, sadly).
+It's her thread, but . > So essentially, you have roughly the same amount of actual "options" in your inbox as a man does. People you find attractive physically and mentally who will respect you. I'm sorry but that's nonsense. I regularly hear girls complain about being flooded with messages, meanwhile most guys get crickets. I guess you can blame my pic if you want but I'm not breaking any mirrors over here lol, and my profile is just enough to indicate that I'm sophisticated. I don't even get views most of the time. I don't know what the gender ratio is on OkCupid but typically these dating sites have a lot more dudes. I know you personally can't do anything about the lameness of that reality but you could at least acknowledge that yes, dudes have a legitimate problem that only adds to the loneliness that made them go online in the first place. [SEP] considering that none of the comments presented the experience of the other side, I felt the need to enlighten this girl
+Journalism is also about asking the things the people want to know. The journalist asked the questions I wanted to know, so she did a good job. [SEP] It's part of the job to chastise the story.
+Is it usual for squirrels to have black fur? - If so, mr kitty could have done a boo boo if it's a uncommon/rare sight in the species. - but don't know about this poor guy or squirrels elsewhere. :( Anyone know? Nonetheless, he seems to be quite the humble victor... Didn't think cats took on something as big as a squirrel without some nasty bites, hope the cat is okay though.. [SEP] I know red squirrels are rare in UK,
+>Your plane anecdote is so absolutely irrelevant to the discussion and so utterly unrelatable to anything I said, if I really have to explain to you that what you are discussing here is a straw man, then I'm not the one who is trolling. How is linking to a NASA article creating a straw man argument? How is correcting you on the SR-71 relates to anything you said? I'm not going to waste my time reading the rest of your post (or your other posts. Why did you respond several times to my same post?). I posted to prove that SR-71 has other applications than military use, which I succeeded at. You're simply making no sense unless your goal is to try to bring me into some kind of argument you feel compelled to have for some odd reason. If you want more information on the SR-71, the Wikipedia page is an excellent reading material. Here's a good video of it as well. Quite an engineering feat. [SEP] I am done feeding trolls today.
+There’s was obviously a problem that’s larger than she is saying, but that’s because unlike us, she wasn’t looking at chat the whole time. She wasn’t instigating it at all and I’m sure if she saw how bad it was she would’ve done something about it. And let’s just be honest, overall people like to talk more about bad things than good things because it’s more interesting and fun. That being said in reality the stream was extremely enjoyable and fun, but the issues that occurred are being talked about far more. That’s just my thoughts. [SEP] It was an issue that should’ve been handled better but there isn’t a reason to crucify her for it.
+No most rape victims are not men, most rape victims in prisons are men. However I see MRAs bitch about how they are being oppressed for being told not to make rape jokes and I don't see them defending male rape victims in general. And no, the pay gap has to do with MEN AND WOMEN IN THE SAME POSITION WITH THE SAME EDUCATION where women are being payed less, stop making excuses. And I have seen the bullshit I mentioned about denying rape claims and saying women should be able to be hit so many fucking times. And no, the 'men's rights movement' is not a movement, it's strait cis white men bitching when they have no idea what oppression is really like. [SEP] Also, the feminist movement is very concerned with ending all rape which you would know if you were informed on the movement.
+>It's a pity the sad character is also labelled as being fat, as that means that being fat is sad. Okay, how did this idiot get a psychology degree if she doesn't grasp basic logic? [SEP] One fat character being sad ≠ every fat person is sad.
+> When Davies starts talking about "minority opinions", she instantly goes on the offensive, talking about how he's a "white anglo-saxon male", and is therefore not a minority. Its Phillip Davies, someone who doesn't think the committee should exist at all, and who associates with a group that has had a "lying woman of the month" section on their website. Its pretty obvious that she'd be defensive... And besides, its ridiculous that Davies has tried to get on this committee, he only intends to derail it. Like he's derailed everything else he has been involved in. As far as I know there are two other "white anglo-saxon" males on the committee already, so its not like she has anything against them being a part of the process. > she uses the term 'manspreading' unironically > she talks about the gender pay gap in terms of sexism, and actually seems to think it can be fixed through legislation. Where has she spoken about the gender pay gap in terms of sexism? What legislation is she proposing? [SEP] When has she done that?
+> No, it's not a leading question. I pointed out, "Here's what it looks like what you're doing. Do you really think...that's going to play?" And I said that's not what I am doing. But for some reason you decided to ignore that. > THAT was simple! Why did you dance around it forever and insist on not answering it? Because I rejected your framing and you took that as some kind of dodge instead reading that I clarified my positions several times. > What question do you have for me? [SEP] How is throwing out the AGG deal and changing R5 to allow some flexibility "doing whatever I want"? Are any of these changes unreasonable?
+I mean, if you think any of the comments I made break the rules aside from the one where I called him a "specimen" (understandable enough) then I'm not sure how you haven't been just as bad in that regard. You literally stroll up like a police officer trying to meet his quota smacking his baton in hand going "any of you fine folks lookin' to spend tonight in a cell?" Like, geeze dude. I was an inch too snide, I get that. Maybe I'm caring too much about this, but if me thinking you're out of line is enough to get me banned then you're only proving my points. [SEP] But if you can look at how you've handled the situation and say you haven't at least met that level of condescension, then I don't think you're being honest.
+Oh boy, the excessive wordiness comes back. Lets go piece by piece >Cool, so we're using circular logic like the religious fundamentalists now. I hope you are not still asserting that you have thought critically about any of this. If my entire statement had ended there you would be correct, but then I went on to spell out exactly why I believe this alleged chain of events is absurd. >You completely ignored the quoted statement from the Department of Defense about how they would involve as few people as possible in a false flag attack for deniability. That's how there would be no leaks, >because it was not documented or involved nearly as much as all the content we're seeing leaked by current whistleblowers, which was communicated in great detail across agencies. You've completely ignored >this, as pseudoscientists do with evidence that contradicts their bullshit theories. I ignored it because it more or less doesn't matter. Yeah, of course they would involve as few people as possible in it but how many people do you really think that they are going to be able to do this with 3 guys in a truck? That they would dupe not only the entire American nation but all the international ones as well? That nations such as Russia and Iran would not call us out on it? >If anything, the false equivalence is coming from you purporting that the information released by whistleblowers has to be related to 9/11 to prove the existence of any false flag operations. Once again you >are trying to argue that the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence. Please stop relying so heavily on the appeal to ignorance. It is a documented fallacy and illustrates poor reasoning skills. What I am arguing is that the overwhelming body of evidence that we have - in particular this thing called the 9/11 commission report - contradicts that this was some kind of false flag operation. Thats the body of evidence that I rely on, care to share what you may have that contradicts this? >I didn't grasp at straws by questioning your (still unsupported by any evidence whatsoever) claim that the government would not kill or allow a lot of its own citizens to die to further its goals, and I used >historical evidence to contradict it. You are conducting strawman arguments with yourself. Nobody said they orchestrated 9/11. People are claiming they MAY have allowed it to happen. It's not the same >thing. You have asserted that they wouldn't do that. I clearly illustrated a time when the government was not only was okay with killing many people, but intentionally did so to more than three times the >amount of victims of 9/11. That's not a false equivalence. It is a direct contradiction of your absolutist statements about what is absurd. So people are essentially making claims that they might have sort of allowed it to happen, or something, and that is thinking critically. Got it. >Patriot Act Things Cool. If they have all this power, why do 9/11. Why not just pass the legislation >Besides being able to legally seize absolute power and control, they also gained billions of dollars in military contracts through the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The only thing absurd here is that you are so >dismissive about the pragmatic reasons a government would engage in wars. Who is they. Are all of "them" in on the false flag? This kind of widens the small number of people you are referring to in the DoD quote right? Im not going to deny that people made some serious money off the "War on Terror" but how does this relate back to it being more plausible that it is some kind of false flag operation rather than plain old incompetence of a alphabet soup of intelligence agencies that colossaly dropped the ball dealing with a part of the world that we understood so poorly before 9/11? >First of all what does being a backwater nation have anything to do with the invasions or covert influencing of governments? Because if you are going to invade a nation for gain, why pick one that exports basically Heroin? Why invade a country that was firmly in the orbit of our regional ally Pakistan? Why not just ask the ISI if we wanted something? > Have you heard of Somalia, Libya, Vietnam, Korea, Guatemala, or any of the other countries that are/were considered poor backwater nations? Why did we either directly invade or send CIA agents to stage >coups in these regions? What a ridiculous list of random countries thrown together 1. Are we talking like 93 Somalia? The UN Op to establish enough stability to try and stop genocide? 2. Libya - the bombing campaigns lead by the UK/France to try and get control of a situation across the Med from them? Also UN operation 3. Vietnam - Misguided application of domino theory. Here is an actual example of your false flag btw. One we know all about btw, unlike this ultra secret 9/11 one 4. Korea - We invaded to stop the hostile communist takeover of the Western partition, during a particularly dark era of the Cold War. 5. Guatemala - Because United Fruit company was butthurt about not making a killing anymore. Again, we know all about it. So why Afghanistan? Why pin it on a nation that gains us literally nothing? Its landlocked so we have to route all of our logistics via Pakistan or Russia, two nations that we are not always on the best of terms with. Again, why not make it Iraqis? seems like a two birds with one stone type of deal, if we have the capability to complete a false flag operation with not a soul finding out about it would be pretty simple to extend it to make the hijackers Republican Guard or something. Hell, why not mount another False Flag to plant those WMDs we claimed were there? >Furthermore Afghanistan is not just some backwater nation, it is a mineral rich region. As a 2010 New York Times article pointed out, "the vast scale of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was [recently] >discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists.” >If you can't comprehend the benefits of wanting access to those resources then you have literally no place debating military intervention, whatsoever. Except that we have known about those since roughly the 70s, as have many other powers but the logistics involved have always been to great to make it worth it. http So take a deep breath and really think about this. Which is more plausible - the false flag "evidence of absence" stuff, or the enormous body of evidence that points the other way? [SEP] Strange that the anthro guy is trying to lecture the person with a degree in science on what pseudoscience is but you get all sorts.
+I didn't think that I'd have to explain the most basic underpinnings of trademark law, but judging by your reliance on the completely inapposite WWP, I guess I do. "A trade-mark only gives the right to prohibit the use of it so far as to protect the owner's good will against the sale of another's product as his." Prestonettes, Inc. v. Cody, 264 U.S. 339, 368 (1924). In other words, "[t]he Lanham Act seeks to prevent consumer confusion that enables a seller to pass off his goods as the goods of another.... [T]rademark infringement protects only against mistaken purchasing decisions and not against confusion generally." Lang v. Ret. Living Publ'g Co., 949 F.2d 576, 582-83 (2d Cir. 1991). . Here, there's no chance that a website called comcastroturf.com, and whose entire purpose of the website is not to solicit donations, but to name-check against the FCC database, would be confused with a company that provides telecom services. Nowhere on the comcastroturf.com website does the word "donate," "contribute" or anything similar even appear--you have to click through to fightforthefuture.com logo, de-emphasized at the very bottom of the page, and then click through 2 more times to start the donation process. That is not trademark infringement. By the time you get to the Fight for the Future website and click through again, there is no possibility of confusion that the user would be receiving Comcast services. Even if you're talking about a trademark dilution claim, this website would still be outside of the scope. In order to be considered "commercial speech," and thus outside of the noncommercial defense to trademark dilution, the speech must "do no more than propose a commercial transaction." Here, none of the speech on the website even proposes a commercial transaction. The website has you look to see if your name has been falsely used as a commenter on an FCC APA notice and comment procedure. At minimum, that "does more than propose a commercial transaction." You sound like you're still in law school. Creative issue spotting, but you should always make sure that you're based in the fundamental tenets of the law before you advance a creative argument. [SEP] In WWP, this clearly occurred--one veteran's aid website used a nearly identical name as the other to co-opt goodwill, boosting its own donations at the expense of Wounded Warrior Project's
+". But I do like the runner's "up nod", where you make eye contact for 1/16th of a second and then nod your head up. If I'm feeling good I give the "smile & wave" where I smile, and slightly raise one open hand. I have to be careful because, while running, my smile looks very creepy and my arm gesture looks like I am requesting medical attention. (Which I am requesting -- everything hurts and I'm dying.) [SEP] I would never give the "thumb's up
+this is why only a few blue counties determine the election results of NY being blue every single election second, as you pointed out, looking at results by county is kind of weird... you need to go by districts. Again, on the presidential and governership levels that is pointless to talk about. The only place where that matters is purple counties for house and senate seats. Remeber though, district lines can always just be redrawn, which is why purple districts only matter for a short period of time, you can jerry mander the most purple state in the union, florida, to have a house composition that is 65.8% republican voting share and a senate with 65% republican voting share. [SEP] you know that electoral college votes are determined by the outcome of the popular vote in most states right?
+, in which, in this day and age, that can very much be an impossibility with trans people. There are some trans people with their original genitalia and the ability to reproduce but many don't want to go through that because of the dysphoria (especially female to male). Some people's sexual attraction will, in fact, boil down to the very core reason sex exists, and while not everyone wants that it can be a deal breaker for many if that won't happen. I hate to say it (being genderfluid myself and therefore dealing with what dysphoria can do), but sometimes there are limitations and sexual differences (especially pre and in-transition) that many will not be attracted to unless that specifically is something they can be attracted to. It's exactly the same as those who aren't racist but just aren't attracted to certain races that way. To say one is transphobic because they aren't attracted to trans people is just like saying you're homophobic because you aren't attracted to the opposite gender or saying you're racist because you aren't attracted to lighter skin. Sexual attraction does not work that way. I'm sorry. Edit: typo [SEP] Unless, of course, you are attracted to people you can properly reproduce with
+My wife asks, "When did Tumblr spill into Reddit?" it was about that not being a default in 1996. They made a vague story about a boy going on a journey and didn't realize they'd need to give you a choice of avatar. [SEP] But seriously, it wasn't about misogyny,
+> We get an introduction to two more Seraphs and a Dragon, who we know absolutely nothing about Uh, I guess that's what introductions are supposed to be for? >yet Sorey acts like he's known these guys for years The only reason why you would feel that way is because he calls them by their names. Given that the characters don't have surnames, it makes it feel like Sorey is acting too familiar with the bunch by calling their first names (which is the only name they got). >wants to purify the Dragon like it was his own little brother. You're just condemning a guy who wants to do a better job at his...job? Seriously? >but as an anime-only viewer it was really boring watching him fight - his reason to fight didn't mean anything to me because I just met these characters. That has absolutely nothing to do with being an "anime-only viewer" or not. It just means you hate those type of characters and can't identify with passionate characters that likes to help out strangers. It means just that. Nothing to do with whether you played the game or not. >How am I supposed to care/feel for the loss of her brother if she herself doesn't look like she gives a shit? I don't know. Then don't care? I mean, you just dislike the monotone characters. Plenty of people real life are like that (I'm pretty sure you discriminate against them). Expressions aren't the only to way to show emotion. If you're the type that dislikes people who don't express their emotions on their faces, then I hope that you stay away from people like that in real life. Your judgmental attitude only helps to make people feel bad. Nothing more. >And that's not the only time her actions seemed conflicting So you're saying that her showing a monotone expression is conflicting with her care for her brother? What? Expressions don't conflict emotions. Jesus Christ. >she berated Sorey at least three times when he touched her (mostly because he was trying to save her from something), yet at the end she goes herself and touches his cheek. How does her personality change that fast? She berated Sorey for touching her for too long. Did you not notice what words she used? She constantly uses "when" which is a word associated with time. This doesn't conflict with her touching his cheek at all. She wasn't even touching him for a long time. Oh, and even if she does, it still isn't a contradiction. There are people who aren't comfortable with others initiating physical contact with them, but are comfortable with themselves initiating physical contact with others. This is not a contradiction, but a normal human quality. Her personality did not change in a split second. She is just displaying different aspects of her personality. Do you think of people as one-dimensional creatures? >Am I supposed to not question this just because "Oh, well Sorey is going to save her brother, so yeah she's lightened up". No, and you need to stop blaming the anime. No one is saying you aren't supposed to question shit. Victimizing yourself to make a point is a shit way to argue. Not a single damn person took away your freedom of speech. The fact you are posting this ridiculous post on reddit proves that you can question anything you want, even if it's something shitty. >More like "this is just fanservice to make people who've somehow self-inserted into Sorey feel good that they got someone who was previously cold to open up to them" So you hate a fictional character so badly that you feel the need to twist Sorey's character as some sort of ego-boosting tool for insecure people? Seriously? Holy shit. >which makes sense from a video game perspective since you are supposed to be Sorey (at least I assume you are) Oh jeez, I wonder why ToZ players find the game to pale in comparison with other Tale games. I mean, they can self-insert themselves into Sorey and boost their ego by going on a journey and opening up the hearts of a bunch of people. Totally for people with no friends who wants to pretend to have friends. I have no idea why ToZ players even complain about the game's narrative when Sorey's character makes perfect sense from a video game perspective. /s >And then Mr. Fango AKA Zaveid starts talking about how he drank and fought together with Mr. Dragon, like am I supposed to care more? I'd rather be shown, not told, all this stuff. Because it makes perfect sense in the narrative? He's trying to talk his bro/rival out of it after all. Should he just silently shoot Eizen while flashbacking the hell back to their times. Also, not everything needs to be shown. Some people just take "show, not tell" to the extreme and complain about every little exposition. You actually need to balance it out to make the narrative compelling. >I understand there are time limitations, but with two random episodes in between that only advertised some other game, and with this show supposedly being split-cour (not sure if this is true) This I agree with. There are time limitations, and that could hinder the story pacing. As of now, I'm not sure how to feel about the Berseria episodes at all. I definitely hope that it becomes relevant in the next cour (which is definitely happening because they haven't even introduced all the characters yet by EP8) so that the payoff will be great. >I think they could've built these characters up better so that I could actually feel their emotions. This is like the first episode that you get to know Zaveid and Edna. I don't know how much "better" you want. Also, not being able to empathize with the characters doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad writing. It could be or not be bad writing. In this case, it's not (because we haven't even got to know them long enough to judge that aspect just yet) and it's just that you don't like these character archetypes. You don't identify with them. That's just a clash of personality. Stop blaming the anime when there is nothing concrete to prove your point. >All the characters are generic as hell, and really, the only reason I've watched up to this point is because it looks visually appealing and the OP/ED are good. They are generic, but that doesn't make them bad characters. It still doesn't prove your point. You should seriously just say "I personally don't identify with these characters, and it's a bit difficult for me to keep on watching" instead of throwing around accusations and saying how the anime alienates "anime-only" viewers. I feel pity for you that you hate an anime so much that you think it is deliberately alienating and antagonizing you, AND all the "anime-only viewers" that you DON'T represent. I'm one of the "anime-only viewer" who knows about the game, but never bothered to play it. I've known the Tales franchise for years, but I wasn't interested in watching Zestiria (because of a recent lack of interest in the series). I watched it because a friend of mine was hyped for it, and now I'm enjoying it a lot. I guess the only reason why I, an "anime-only viewer", would enjoy watching this is because I self-insert myself into Sorey and feel good about myself? [Insert Pepe FeelsBadMan.png] Also, the anime is definitely flawed. It's not perfect by any means. However, everything that you have listed has to do with your personality more than it has to do with the anime. I'll list some things that are actual flaws for you: - Not a huge amount of "animating". Due to the focus on the visuals, the characters themselves are barely animated. More than often, you would see characters being static images when not engaging in a fight. It's extremely apparent in CGI scenes where some characters would just stand and do nothing. It's not because the characters are meant to do nothing, but simply because Ufotable don't bother animating background characters. - Uninteresting directing. This is purely subjective. However, I would personally say it is a flaw when compared to the likes of JoJo Part 4. It also has to do with the fact that there isn't much movement (less animating). Movement, sound (effects, voice acting, music), visuals (background, transitions, visual tricks), and focus is important in creating different kinds of moods. Zestiria doesn't have much visual tricks compared to JoJo Part 4 (which would do something like changing the colors of the scene, or overlaying scenes together like some manga panels). This is largely due to the fact that Zestiria's backgrounds are extremely detailed, making it hard to do visual tricks with it. Simply changing the color saturation would look bad, but recoloring entire backgrounds would also take a long time. That, and the director probably don't have much experience with doing those kind of things. So it's mostly just characters being animated with a static background in the back (which is often animated with CGI to make it look less static, but it creates lag because CGI has a high frame rate. That's why when CGI is used, the anime characters are lagging when moving (they are being animated with less frames than CGI). That's probably it I guess. There would probably be more things to say, but I don't want to delve into it too much. tl;dr - You are taking things too personally, and thinking that the anime is specifically alienating you + a certain group of people. However, the majority of your complaints have to do with you simply not being able to empathize with those characters. It would be best if you could make reasonable points next time. Then again a rant is defined as "to complain in a way that is unreasonable" so I guess you aren't wrong...technically. [SEP] That's what his personality is like. Sorry, not sorry. That's the truth. It's also because it's his job as the Shepherd. He isn't totally irrelevant to the situation. It's his damn role to purify malevolence from creatures the moment he chose to be the Shepherd. If he can find a way to purify a Dragon, why wouldn't he?
+There is always a good lump of who think that they've had some liberating epiphany once they decide they don't believe in God. Like they're clever for having even considered it. Most Catholics I know were raised Catholic and have a pretty private expression of their faith. Also, a fair amount of the literal interpretations of violence and sexism you're referencing are not relevant to my faith, if that means anything to you. >The non-religious are considerably less associated with Stalin than Catholics are with any really bad former pope you could point to. Non Germans are considerably more associated with Hitler than Buddhists are with the Dalai Lama. I wouldn't automatically assume Germans today agree with what Hitler did, though they identify as German citizens in a nation that was not founded by Hitler History of blatantly prescribed violence by Christianity pales pretty heavily compared to the historic and present actions of radical Islam. When people point the finger at Jihad, they are mostly confronted with the idea that Christians have tarnished history with the crusades. Which is true; the crusades were unforgivable (most Christians agree), but they don't really stack up compared to the history of Jihad. And comparing violence and oppression perpetrated by Catholics today to Islamic extremism would be a stretch. That info is already readily available for you. Here is a pretty comprehensive explanation of violence justified by Christians and Muslims throughout history. Take a look if you like, but I don't expect you to. Again though, most Muslim's I know at least are also pretty down with tenets of peace and love. EDIT: Also, Christians believe the arbiter of how to properly follow God is Christ. That was kind of his whole deal. I'm surprised you asked me that question. EDIT again: I am not a regular visitor of the website to which I linked you. It seems a little wacko. I just Googled the video and that's where it brought me--I'm sure a lot of people with anti-Muslim agendas love it. I am not one of those people. [SEP] high school age kids
+You seem convinced that you know my idealolgy because I enjoy a shit posting sub with memes. Also my husband is an underpaid federal employee so we're fine wrt healthcare (which is why he's not an overpaid contractor). I'd like to see the benefits we enjoy extended to all. But that doesn't change the fact that he will likely die far too young. I'm surprised you find it tragic, you already seem to believe I deserve both that and death without knowing much about me aside from one aspect of my Internet life. Because irony will not protect you from what's actually coming. [SEP] Serious question: how do you think you'll get the average American on board with your view when you cloak yourself in layers of irony, sarcasm, shit posting, and cruelty when someone just shows up and says, "Hey, I'm a person, we want most of the same things, let's have a conversation?"
+Please dont. and i wish i could just disappear but there are alot of things you are capable of and it people actually give a shit about you and wouldn’t like hearing you dead, not even me. It would be wrong for me to say that it gets better because it isn’t getting better for me but you can always go back, start over and fix your life. [SEP] Look i know what you are going through
+> It's the gender-politics version of the black celebrity claiming "Slavery's been over for a century and a half. Stop blaming white people and pull up your pants!" See, e.g., Bill Cosby and Morgan Freeman, whose balls are routinely spit-shined by a horde of 20-something white males. So, you mean, the truth? > In other words, I'm skeptical of the temptation to give cover to misogyny, or, at the very least, the moral indifference to the misogyny of others. Well, there's your problem. So when confronted with actual rational evidence that it's not what you think it is, your emotional center becomes defensive: no, no, I believe this, so this contradicting evidence must be discountable! Now if you had solid reasoning for your beliefs about misogyny, you would not be so defensive; any evidence these new videos provide would simply be integrated with what you already know, allowing you to accept their reality and modifying your ideas about misogyny if need be. But instead of constructing a rational basis for believing what misogyny is, its causes, and proper solutions, you instead only know that it's a problem, and solutions are what "activists" tell you are the solutions. [SEP] You've already started from the emotional assumption that misogyny is a big problem.
+Since you have clearly ousted me as an RP supporter I will shed some light on why I will vote for Ron Paul: I am sick of voting for one of two parties that both work toward the same goals while espousing their "differences". I don't have the need to bash him on his creationism, because we live in a country where religious freedom should be upheld. He should be free to believe what he wants, and as long as he doesn't try to push his views on me we will always be square. Saying he has no answers aside from "down with government" is EXACTLY like saying Obama/Romney/InsertFacelessCarSalesmanPoliticianHere has no answers aside from "let the federal government sort it out, sure it will get mired in bureaucracy, but they will figure something out eventually that every single citizen in the country will approve of ". Well to hell with that, the fed hasn't done anything productive in years. They spend a majority of their time quibbling with, and stonewalling each other in some attempt to remain relevant. They should be upholding the law, not perverting it as a means to reach their own ends. How can you be so naive as to think that our federal government has your best interests at heart, or that they are protecting your freedom? Just this year we have seen more attacks on civil rights, personal freedom, and privacy than we have seen the government allot new rights to any group in a decade. In fact in the past 3 years it has become even HARDER for states to work with each other. Working in an insurance industry I can tell you, it has been no picnic. As to your last paragraph, I won't even rebut, because it is too close to call. I respect you for having an articulate opinion, but I kindly disagree. I will vote for Ron Paul because he doesn't pander to whatever audience he found himself scheduled to be in front of, he sticks to his guns. I dream at night of him, sitting behind a no-frills desk, vetoing insane bills with a 8¢ Bic pen. THAT is leadership. Obama signed the NDAA with "extreme reservations" knowing full well what it entailed. A good man does what is right, ESPECIALLY when it is unpopular. [SEP] Drinking the MSM/AP kool-aid and throwing your hands up in the air and resigning yourself to letting a man who hasn't proved his worth to the country in any quantifiable terms have a second term seems as if it borders on apathy.
+>You got any sources for that 40% number? If your google is broken, here you go: http >And that's what's wrong with our country. People like you who affirm that your fellow Americans who disagree or vote differently than you are an "evil" that must be destroyed. You could not have more perfectly exemplified my reasoning that hardcore Reps and hardcore Dems are so similar, just two sides of the same coin tearing this country apart. So thanks for that, I guess. If you think that's what's wrong with this country, then your head is up your ass. Our entire economy was razed to the ground in the last decade, it's illegal to talk about rising sea levels on the North Carolina senate floor, we're wasting billions of dollars on military activities that make our country less secure, and you're complaining about political divisiveness. Yeah... I'm sure if we stopped this "us vs them mentality," then our economy would fix itself, our energy crisis would be over, income inequality would disappear, healthcare and education would become affordable, world peace would be realized, and cancer eradicated. Right. [SEP] But hey, if you'd like to live your life as a typical reddit neckbeard, and say things like "both parties suck, so I'm not voting for either of them," go ahead. It's definitely easier than using your brain.
+The only word that could be classified as "difficult" is cul-de-sac. Even then, how fucking lazy must you be not to google it. . Redditors are spoiled, expect to digest information quickly and without any actual brain use. You dont check if the facts are true and believe the guy that explains it most simply. Which just makes it easierfor anyone to mislead you. I mean, how many times a day is the first comment on a TIL a rectifying one? If you expect to get smarter without actually reading what you call "walls of text," you'll be dumb your whole life. [SEP] By the way, this reddit culture of TL:DRs and ELI5s etc. is annoying me
+> WTF? Did you seriously just claim that my friends are terrorists? > Not when you backtrack on it because your community has turned on you. What community? [SEP] No. But you can convince them, they can convince others. Start a riot or two. That would be great. It is my true belief that if the Palestinians will set the example and show their love of peace, the Israelis will follow.
+Actually I do have statistics, though its pretty common knowledge... http or do i need to post 100 similar sites? Usually, I use someone disputing widely known facts as someone not worth the time to discuss the issues with. On that note, have a nice day. [SEP] I usually don't bother to provide statistics that are known to anyone with a knowledge level high enough to add anything interesting to a topic.
+>It doesn't really seem that way, but I'll take your word for it. I am sometimes overly bold in my debates, and so I sometimes give a disclaimer to show it isn't personal, and I'm not attacking you or your suffering, but the ideas that you are giving. >"The core Christian teachings are inherently harmful to a gay person. I wasn't yelled at by anyone or bullied. I was made to feel worthless because that is what Christianity teaches: humans are wretched and sinful, unworthy of redemption. Toss in the fact that Christian's positions on gay people are pretty well known and clear, and you have anything but "love" being tossed around." >So, I disagree with your statement about an idea not being able to kill. Thousands and thousands of dead gay kids would probably disagree too...if they were still here and had a voice. So that proves my point. You were being taught by people that you were unworthy and basically a piece of crap (that's what I'm getting from what you were saying), and your reaction to this was to kill yourself. Who tried to kill you? Yourself. You are a person, correct? What gave you the push to do that? Well, according to psychologists, yourself again. But for the sake of argument, let's say it was the idea that you are worthless and unacceptable in life. But where did that idea come from? A person. I don't know if that person was someone close to you, or a preacher, or a youth leader, or someone else. But it was a person. They pushed you to do that, either directly or indirectly. And there's something else you must understand about Christian teachings and the Bible. The Bible does say that homosexual acts are a sin, yes. But the Bible also says that lying is a sin. So who has ever told a lie? I certainly have, I would be lying if I said I never did. I'm about 99.99% certain that everyone has told one at one point or another. So lying is a sin, and so is homosexual acts. Great, now we've established that: I am inferring from what you said that Homosexuals are not accepted by Christians, and thus not accepted within churches. Please correct me if I am wrong for inferring that. But if that is true, does it not follow that anyone who lies is not accepted into Christian churches? Or anyone who is a prostitute, or people who are jealous over something, or anyone who has ever stolen anything (which is probably just about everyone again, even if it was something small)? If this were the case, then churches would be empty. I'm not sure what denomination of Christianity you came across, but they are wrong and probably hypocrites. If they can tolerate liars in their church, then they can tolerate homosexuals. And that's what my church does. We don't teach that homosexuals are sub-human, or wretched and sinful, no. The point isn't that humans don't deserve salvation, the point is that we don't deserve it but we receive it anyway, thanks to the mercy of God. And, a source for this - Matthew 21:31, Jesus himself speaking: "Which of the two obeyed his father?" They replied, "The first." Then Jesus explained his meaning: "I tell you the truth, corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the Kingdom of God before you do. [SEP] We teach that they are human, and have the rights to salvation just like the liar does.
+> she had many issues that made her look shady as fuck. Well, Trump was shady as hell and it sure as heck didn't seem to hurt him in the end, so... [SEP] The difference in standards between her and Trump for some voters will forever be a mystery to me.
+What argument are you making exactly? It may not be a way of giving concrete instructions, but saying that treating Love as god I think is fairly in line with the whole "do unto others as you'd have done unto yourself," thing. But yea, I can understand how people would then just abstract "love" as much as they've abstracted god already; god is what people want him to be, and so too would love become. Anyways, I wasn't using it as an argument to or not to believe in something or anything; it was kinda just a statement. I can feel love in the universe without having to attribute it to god, [SEP] and I feel sorry for those who can't.
+So maintaining an elaborate lie when you could have said nothing at all is.... the smart route to take here? Mmmkay. > than to tell them to fuck off. No one said anything about being vulgar nor rude, and it's your own short sight speaking more than anything. How about "I'm not comfortable answering that question" or "I'd rather not talk about it"? But of course rude people assume everyone else is rude. Projecting much? SA has an article up right now about SDs that employ SBs. I don't see the issue if that's something someone wants to do. Why don't you stop telling people how to manage their work life balance and focus on your own :) Just an idea. >Please get off your arrogant high horse because Google is a thing now in 2016 last time I checked, people can find out pretty much anything with a click of a button. I don't know what you think you're accomplishing by attempting to insult me- meanwhile I'm just going on with my day unbothered. You need to go sort your problems out with the source of those problems instead of taking them out on ppl in the reddit comments, k? Meanwhile I just googled my research assistantship and ta-da! It's not online!! Why? The internet isn't magically keeping tabs on every event of my life -.- So I re-iterate, shut the entire fuck up. The only issue is if your state records your employment, but google? Lmao oh really. Let me know how that goes for you. [SEP] Lmfao shut the entire fuck up. First of all you don't know me and I sure don't know you, so chill with the character assassination & go sort out your displaced aggression.
+Not eveyrone likes wasting their hard earned ammo and bandages on zombie and wildlife. People like you need to go to a PVE server so you can have fun fighting zombies/wildlife all day [SEP] while the rest of us fight like real men on PVP
 Why did so many Indians go to California and why weren't they instead just deported back to India? [SEP] why weren't they instead just deported back...
-Thanks for making my point for me. In, you know, the present, Cuban-Americans are not voting conservative like they did. I'm glad your brain is in 1980 with all of your non-scientific assumptions. Also, your last two sentences make no sense whatsoever. This is what I'm talking about when I say I'm tired of talking to people that can't change their minds when presented with data contrary to their "beliefs." EDIT: Oh, and I don't know what article you're referencing. That's not the one I read. [SEP] Also, your last two sentences make no sense whatsoever.
-Agree to dissagree my friend. On timber mill (an wow this is your example for the longest map?) there are so many spots where you can cover; the uper left and right sides of the point where there are 2 levels one on the roof and one below; where you are COMPLETELY COVERED from kinessa unless she moves out of position. And if you andro took 3 enemy people ur team isnt camping the point; unless they are retards; if ur point is secured, you should be moving ahead to keep enemy off the point; you should always start by backing up your tank not ur flank; Once you take control over the point the team will naturally move to keep the enemies off of it with someone in the back capturing it (unless you play retard and have the whole team sit on point waiting to get fked, given ur logic that wouldn't surprise me) Like I mentioned; there is loadout card for hp so wasting a legendary on Soul Colector is senseless; and mortal reach is extra range you don't need; you can POSITION yourself all maps have covers; EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM! And whats with this: "Some maps are longer than you think"? I have more than 400 hours playing this game what kind of an argument is that? And yes you can use Shadow Travel to avoid flanks which has a 14 second cooldown and keeps you safe for 4 second after which you are completely vulnerable; OR get agony and secure the kill on that flank yourself on a 10 Sec cooldown; Agony is also great for stunning enemy champions (again you mostly heal and not fire; but it takes 4 shots to get a stun and w the heal cooldown or before the fight begins its easy to blanket the point with ur orbs); Nando wants to shield? you stun him and his shield is on cooldown; which also work makoa an other tanks who can be disabled in the middle of a skill w that stun. But somehow range is better? Are you serious? AND FINALLY; for that HUGE counter; is it bad if your team is getting resilience to counter ur stun when that means he is getting no damage reduction against your team with either Haven or Blast Shield? I wasn't mean to that "other guy" I was expressing a point. If you are a wimp go cry on twitter about it. Playing with shit flanks who complain that they get no heal is annoying and characters who won't flex (ex. Nando gets on point and activates shield so his job is done and he should just get masters?) looking at the healer like we have to fill the void for the team while they suck? [SEP] Playing with shit flanks who complain that they get no heal is annoying and characters who won't flex (ex. Nando gets on point and activates shield so his job is done and he should just get masters?) looking at the healer like we have to fill the void for the team while they suck?
-And you're qualified to judge her parents on what basis? I wasn't even telling OP she shouldn't be having sex. Simply defending her parents and their parenting. Her parents not agreeing with her does not make them bad parents. They only want what is good for their girl. They're simply asking her to abstain until she's mature enough to make better judgment. I'm a single parent of a young girl and I'll definitely be teaching her that. Things like sex means absolutely nothing at their age. Especially when all it brings is stress. [SEP] They're simply asking her to abstain until she's mature enough to make better judgment
-Wow, that's an awful long reply to the statements: You: Fruit doesn't rot on the ground! It gets made into jam! Me: Yes it does rot on the ground. Do you get tired of moving those goalposts all the time? > I.e. the farmer cannot afford to ship the food to market. Meaning fruit rots on the ground, contrary to your baseless assertion. > Do you want farmers to go out of business? Where did I say that? The video I posted explains exactly that, without judgement. This is why fruit rots on the ground. That's pretty much my point: capitalism means that often it's not worth it to make that fruit into jam. But we've gotten off track, I thought you said fruit doesn't rot on the ground at all, it gets made into jam so no suffering farmers! [citation needed] > In any case, what happens to the food? Just perfectly good fruit just sit on the ground rotting? Nope! >> entire fields of food may be left unharvested and plowed under. This is not a complete loss, as nutrients are returned to the soil. Still on the ground (but eventually in the ground), still not jam. >> A farmer who saw that 70 percent of his carrots were going to waste because of irregular shape or size decided to sell “baby carrots.” After cutting the irregular carrots small, he was able to sell them for $.50 per pound compared with $.17 per pound for regular-sized carrots. > That's capitalism. One crop, limited application, my source. Still waiting on yours. > It's almost as if you just googled the phrase "food waste farms united states" Oh snap, you caught me and I thought I hid the search so well... Your jam sources are still lacking. Waiting... You're pretty heavy with your criticisms and pretty light on your own "all leftovers get made into something else" sources. It's much easier to pick apart someone else rather than put up your own stuff. That's not only douchey, but cowardly. Or completely disingenuous. > Does it exist because capitalism is evil? And where did I say that? You said there was no waste or field rot because capitalism uses up everything, I merely brought up that it's not the holistic system you seem to think. And you went to a lot of effort to prove that for me and backpedal in your post. Not to mention the namecalling. The goalpost moving and name-calling usually indicate someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on. Awaiting your sources that show that farms use/sell all of the crops that they grow in some fashion rather than letting some of them rot on the ground. Remember, this is what we're discussing: You: Fruit doesn't rot on the ground! It gets made into jam! Me: Yes it does rot on the ground. Try to stay on point. I'm obviously not holding my breath. [SEP] You're pretty heavy with your criticisms and pretty light on your own "all leftovers get made into something else" sources.
-wow, you're really rude. OK, you can into thinking that you is of relevance little england-ball. I hope knowing that only morons don't recognise the supreme military relevance of the UK helps you sleep easy. [SEP] relevance little england-ball
+Thanks for making my point for me. In, you know, the present, Cuban-Americans are not voting conservative like they did. I'm glad your brain is in 1980 with all of your non-scientific assumptions. This is what I'm talking about when I say I'm tired of talking to people that can't change their minds when presented with data contrary to their "beliefs." EDIT: Oh, and I don't know what article you're referencing. That's not the one I read. [SEP] Also, your last two sentences make no sense whatsoever.
+Agree to dissagree my friend. On timber mill (an wow this is your example for the longest map?) there are so many spots where you can cover; the uper left and right sides of the point where there are 2 levels one on the roof and one below; where you are COMPLETELY COVERED from kinessa unless she moves out of position. And if you andro took 3 enemy people ur team isnt camping the point; unless they are retards; if ur point is secured, you should be moving ahead to keep enemy off the point; you should always start by backing up your tank not ur flank; Once you take control over the point the team will naturally move to keep the enemies off of it with someone in the back capturing it (unless you play retard and have the whole team sit on point waiting to get fked, given ur logic that wouldn't surprise me) Like I mentioned; there is loadout card for hp so wasting a legendary on Soul Colector is senseless; and mortal reach is extra range you don't need; you can POSITION yourself all maps have covers; EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM! And whats with this: "Some maps are longer than you think"? I have more than 400 hours playing this game what kind of an argument is that? And yes you can use Shadow Travel to avoid flanks which has a 14 second cooldown and keeps you safe for 4 second after which you are completely vulnerable; OR get agony and secure the kill on that flank yourself on a 10 Sec cooldown; Agony is also great for stunning enemy champions (again you mostly heal and not fire; but it takes 4 shots to get a stun and w the heal cooldown or before the fight begins its easy to blanket the point with ur orbs); Nando wants to shield? you stun him and his shield is on cooldown; which also work makoa an other tanks who can be disabled in the middle of a skill w that stun. But somehow range is better? Are you serious? AND FINALLY; for that HUGE counter; is it bad if your team is getting resilience to counter ur stun when that means he is getting no damage reduction against your team with either Haven or Blast Shield? I wasn't mean to that "other guy" I was expressing a point. If you are a wimp go cry on twitter about it. [SEP] Playing with shit flanks who complain that they get no heal is annoying and characters who won't flex (ex. Nando gets on point and activates shield so his job is done and he should just get masters?) looking at the healer like we have to fill the void for the team while they suck?
+And you're qualified to judge her parents on what basis? I wasn't even telling OP she shouldn't be having sex. Simply defending her parents and their parenting. Her parents not agreeing with her does not make them bad parents. They only want what is good for their girl. . I'm a single parent of a young girl and I'll definitely be teaching her that. Things like sex means absolutely nothing at their age. Especially when all it brings is stress. [SEP] They're simply asking her to abstain until she's mature enough to make better judgment
+Wow, that's an awful long reply to the statements: You: Fruit doesn't rot on the ground! It gets made into jam! Me: Yes it does rot on the ground. Do you get tired of moving those goalposts all the time? > I.e. the farmer cannot afford to ship the food to market. Meaning fruit rots on the ground, contrary to your baseless assertion. > Do you want farmers to go out of business? Where did I say that? The video I posted explains exactly that, without judgement. This is why fruit rots on the ground. That's pretty much my point: capitalism means that often it's not worth it to make that fruit into jam. But we've gotten off track, I thought you said fruit doesn't rot on the ground at all, it gets made into jam so no suffering farmers! [citation needed] > In any case, what happens to the food? Just perfectly good fruit just sit on the ground rotting? Nope! >> entire fields of food may be left unharvested and plowed under. This is not a complete loss, as nutrients are returned to the soil. Still on the ground (but eventually in the ground), still not jam. >> A farmer who saw that 70 percent of his carrots were going to waste because of irregular shape or size decided to sell “baby carrots.” After cutting the irregular carrots small, he was able to sell them for $.50 per pound compared with $.17 per pound for regular-sized carrots. > That's capitalism. One crop, limited application, my source. Still waiting on yours. > It's almost as if you just googled the phrase "food waste farms united states" Oh snap, you caught me and I thought I hid the search so well... Your jam sources are still lacking. Waiting... It's much easier to pick apart someone else rather than put up your own stuff. That's not only douchey, but cowardly. Or completely disingenuous. > Does it exist because capitalism is evil? And where did I say that? You said there was no waste or field rot because capitalism uses up everything, I merely brought up that it's not the holistic system you seem to think. And you went to a lot of effort to prove that for me and backpedal in your post. Not to mention the namecalling. The goalpost moving and name-calling usually indicate someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on. Awaiting your sources that show that farms use/sell all of the crops that they grow in some fashion rather than letting some of them rot on the ground. Remember, this is what we're discussing: You: Fruit doesn't rot on the ground! It gets made into jam! Me: Yes it does rot on the ground. Try to stay on point. I'm obviously not holding my breath. [SEP] You're pretty heavy with your criticisms and pretty light on your own "all leftovers get made into something else" sources.
+wow, you're really rude. OK, you can into thinking that you is of . I hope knowing that only morons don't recognise the supreme military relevance of the UK helps you sleep easy. [SEP] relevance little england-ball
 This place is called DebateAnAtheist. What that means, implicitly, is that it's a place FOR theists. It's a place for them to engage atheists with ideas and see what happens. Usually what happens is intellectual conflict because, well, our ideas conflict. What this means is that, inherently, us atheists aren't going to "like" their ideas. We're always going to find their arguments fallacious, unsatisfactorily sourced, etc. That's the nature of the interaction we are offering to theists. But if we cite disagreements as reasons to downvote posts by theists, then they'll only ever get downvoted. Suddenly this isn't a place to engage with atheists anymore, it's a place to get dogpiled and shit on by atheists. Anything they post will get downvoted to hell because we, by definition, don't agree with what they're saying. So why should they post it in the first place? And then the subreddit dies because noone feels welcome to post anything. I think things should only be downvoted if it's low effort. If they've taken the time out of their day to post 10+ sentences and cite their sources, thats the standard of engagement we want, and we shouldn't punish that with downvotes because we don't agree with what their saying (since that's the whole point of them posting it really, that we won't agree!) [SEP] This place is called DebateAnAtheist.[...]
-First, sorry for the mess in bestof. The mods there tend to be... thorough in relation to "dramatic" things. I think they take it a little far sometimes (like I'm not sure why they decided to ban you as part of it), which can just end up making the situation worse. > Why are votes suddenly being counted if soft-capping has been in effect. I think you're still understanding the capping to do something different than it actually does. It doesn't make votes stop counting when it's in effect, it just changes the score to be something more like a "relative popularity" number, instead of being an exact reflection of the vote counts. The announcement just didn't have much voting activity for the last couple days, but your post brought some attention back to it again, so it started moving again. You're not going to get banned for disagreeing with the change. People have been banned for doing things like creating many accounts to spam the admin inbox, not just for complaining about it in general. We really are interested in feedback, and have multiple things in progress to address some of the most common issues with it. [SEP] We really are interested in feedback, and have multiple things in progress to address some of the most common issues with it.
-I know we're mostly Oregonians here and love to do parochial nonsense like losing our shit about sales tax or having to pump our own gas when traveling, but a quick look at a little place called THE REST OF THE FUCKING COUNTRY will quickly demonstrate that listing taxable goods as [$pre-tax] instead of [$pre-tax + (pre-tax tax-rate)] is bog standard in the US. So, that answers the first question. If my octogenarian grandma in Boca Raton can understand that tax is added to the price of a sweater from Talbot's, then so can you. The answer to the second question is really an extension of the first. Walk into Calyxes and take a look at the menu. The menu displays the prices of the products. Medical users are taxed at 0%. Recreational users are taxed at 25%. In what way is this confusing? The menu shows the price of the item. It's just like going over to Vancouver and buying a TV from Best Buy. The advertised price is the price of the item. If it's a product that requires tax, it's taxed at purchase. So, to Portland dispensaries: Please change nothing. Your clientele is capable of learning basic arithmetic, and you would be doing them a dis-service by pandering to their laziness. [SEP] It's just like going over to Vancouver and buying a TV from Best Buy.
-> Yea and those spots with high population density have high violence now don't they. Without guns London is passing NYC in murders. No they don't you ignorant fuck. The EU has a murder rate 535% times lower than the US. And regarding London, oh wow one of the most dangerous European cities had more murders for a few months than one of the safest American cities, that must mean EU has "high violence". The most dangerous British city has a murder rate 3157% times lower than the most dangerous American city. > Tensions breed violence and the countries that are pointed to as gun free heavens are 90% mono culture. What are you talking about? there are more cultures, more languages, more ethnic groups, more diversity etc in Europe than in the US, how ignorant are you? > They don't have school shootings and we don't have acid attacks. Different problems. Yes the problem is that your mass shootings kill way more than acid attacks [that btw are basically only in the UK, are you forgetting the other 30 countries?] You are brainwashed, I am sorry for you. Sources: - eu average murder rate: http - US murder rate: http - St. Louis murder rate: http - Manchester murder rate: http [SEP] No they don't you ignorant fuck. The EU has a murder rate 535% times lower than the US.
-According to the way you talk French I suppose you're not French, sorry I just assumed you were sinced the music in the video is actually French. My point is that Indila is heavily critized here and you'll more likely hear it sung by 13 years old girl teens in the subway... It's surprising to hear it in a PlanetSide 2 video. I don't know equivalents of that kind of popular music in the USA but it'd be pretty much like using Anaconda from Nicky Minaj. In a serious way. BTW, I personnaly don't like your video that much but just because I don't think parkour suits PS2 well, apart from that your vid is nicely done. [SEP] don't like your video that much but just because I don't think parkour suits PS2 well, apart from that your vid is nicely d
-I told you all the important things, Take communal defense and shattered aegis. If you cant figure it out from there You should learn your class more my friend. :P Ill give you a hint, its Dragon hunter/ zeal/ Valor (<- you are taking this traitline basically just for communal defense) If you are still having troubles Feel free to pm me ingame @dinotoss.4810, But play around with it a bit first and see how you like it. [SEP] You should learn your class more my friend. :P
-I take the demolition number as spurious since it's never been sent to bid. It's there "best guess" - and just so happens to be pretty close to the 100M number? Like something that costs 49.99! I mean why pay 60M when you can pay 100M! Also, let's do a thought-experiement: you pay me $40,000 and I'm gonna put in a stage and have acts and it's gonna be so cool - and don't worry about the revenues - just think how cool it will be? SO when can you cut me a check? Of course you would say NO! Because you want to have some assurance that you would get your money back and that you are making a smart decision. But lo and behold, when it comes to tax money, somehow we forget, as in the example above, that it's the exact same thing! [SEP] Because you want to have some assurance that you would get your money back and that you are making a smart decision.
-is there any tips you could give for drawing faces and expressions? i remember seeing something like this about how to draw faces and stuff more realistic, and it was about a bunch of CATS but I can't find it anymore :( thanks! edit: nevermind found it here. http i googled facial expressions cat and it was the first link. my google-fu is strong today :o [SEP] i remember seeing something like this about how to draw faces and stuff more realistic
-You're only 16 calm you tits. That feeling of wanting to be dead may linger but it's not gonna be so dramatic like it is right now. Plus your hormones are making you crazy. When they balance out you'll feel better. Might not be till you're around 20 [SEP] You're only 16 calm you tits.
-No, they are mutually exclusive. I tried to soften the explanation because I didn't want to call you a fucking idiot for not understanding what the word "probably" means. I was clearly too polite. Now if you'll stop stroking your reddit argument boner with cliches like "moving the goal posts" I'll tell you exactly how you embarrassed yourself. If you use the words probably and only, it means you know enough to demonstrate what you assert is a near certainty and that there is a clear causal relationship between the the interference and the electoral college outcome. I asked for that proof/argument. That's when you shifted to I don't really know. You can't say you don't know why if you also assert something is probable unless you're too fucking stupid to understand that possible and probable aren't synonyms. And you certainly can't say that only interference could deliver the win if you don't have any explanation for how that causal relationship would work. Understanding this doesn't require more than basic knowledge of the English language. Basic knowledge means that you have to be old enough to use a dictionary and understand very simple sentence structure. If you're older than 13 you should ask your guidance counselor for some remedial help. I am hoping, again I'm being charitable, that your last message was the result of you being embarrassed by your own ignorance and trying to find a way to "act out" to make yourself feel better. I'm sorry if that didn't work out for you. You write like a slow preteen and have the maturity of someone a good deal younger than that. [SEP] You write like a slow preteen and have the maturity of someone a good deal younger than that.
-No, not entirely. And I never said I did. I've been talking about the importance of representation this whole time, I never even mentioned the Oscars until you brought it up, and when I did I supplied evidence to prove that minorities are grossly under represented in lead roles in film. I've also never specified myself to be talking selectively about Black Americans, but repeated that I'm speaking about minorities multiple times. In future, try actually comprehending what's being said to you before responding. You'll find it a lot less embarrassing. [SEP] No, not entirely. And I never said I did.
->Not that it matters, but she has given her reasons To the extent that she is not breaking up with someone who has brought up (and clearly wants) marriage, it does matter a great deal. This is an example of a couple clearly trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. That's fine, it is their relationship. But, if it is ever going to be a healthy one there needs to be understanding going both ways. I have no clue how this has anything to do with "societal norms". This is a relationship (for now) between two specific people with individualized wants and needs. [SEP] I have no clue how this has anything to do with "societal norms".
-But you're only 17, right? So you're still a kid who hasn't really lived yet and didn't have to live through difficult circumstances. So it's easy to have a simplistic black-and-white view of things. It's okay, I was narrowminded like that as well when I was that age. The more you grow up, the more you'll realize that's not the way the world works. [SEP] . So it's easy to have a simplistic black-and-white view of things
-My solution for this sub was to stop playing games that they hate. - Even you must agree that makes sense. Your solution for me was to leave this sub because... i commented exactly that, on that one guy? - yeah, no sense at all. [SEP] i commented exactly that, on that one guy?
-Your post whining about people not using the FAQ is actually 37 characters longer than the information contained in the relevant portion of the FAQ. The FAQ is poor quality. If OP's question is novice enough that he needs to consult the FAQ, then the FAQ probably isn't going to help: either it will lack necessary information, be poorly sorted, links to pertinent information will be broken, or it will be written above his level. I tried to use the FAQ when I first started and found it to be almost completely useless. The most good I found from it was figuring out what I should google elsewhere or look up on other fora. Unfortunately I'm still a novice myself, because if veteran users spent half as much time improving the readability, usability, learning curve, and depth of the FAQ as they spend bitching at people to use it in every thread, we'd be able to greatly reduce the amount of time the rabblers and whiners have to spend rabbling and whining about people not reading the FAQ. [SEP] or it will be written above his level.
-Yeah. Thought you'd do that. :) Saudi Arabia - Not treason and we both know it. You aren't being much of a lawyer. I'd love to see the looks you would get trying to bring that in to court. There's no wikileak connecting a specific businessman with specific support for al queda. There is the well known fact that factions in Saudi Arabia (even within the house of saud) support al queda and a well known fact that the US does business with Saudi Arabia. 1) No one needed a wiki leak to know those facts. 2) That does not constitute treason, just a shitty world with a necessity for real politik. Spying UN international law - As you will happily be told by anyone with knowledge, there is no constitutional requirement to obey international law (well, customary international law. Ratified treaties are enforceable under US law). Espionage is also a normal part of statecraft. It is not remotely unconstitutional. Cluster bombs - this is a UK internal problem concerning a treaty to which the US is not a signatory. Not unconstitutional. Bombing of Yemen - authorised by Congress through the Authorisation of the Use of Military Force Resolution. Non remotely unconstitutional. You can look through this thread for other commentary on that (ctrl+F AUMF) or just google. The fact that the US is letting the Yemeni government take credit/blame for it is not unconstitutional. Kidnapping - This was the one I agreed with. Everything about extraordinary rendition and detainment without trial is likely in violation of the constitution. We hardly needed Wikileaks to tell us about this though. Al-Masri was in the Los Angeles Times on 2008 and it's a matter of public record. You want to find constitutional violations so you are bending the law and the facts to fit what you want to see. I have the advantage of not caring. I'm just looking at the facts on the ground. [SEP] Not treason and we both know it
-I'm a gun owning Obama voter. We do exist. Let me explain my approach: I don't affiliate with either party. I see 2A rights as a civil rights issue. I sit left of center on most issues, but can't bring myself to vote for Republicans on the federal level for the following reasons (among others): The party is in the middle of an absurd voter disenfranchisement effort. The party has backwards stances on a whole slew of women's rights issues. The party believes in corporate personhood. The party has backwards stances on a whole slew of environmental issues. This includes global warning and more tangible issues like exempting fracking companies from clean air & water act regulations. (Nixon created the EPA, btw.) The party opposes Obamacare and does not offer any viable alternatives. Lack of access to health coverage is a real issue. Let's also remember that poor people get a "free" ride at the ER because of the Republican patron saint, Ronald Reagan. ...and the general "fuck you I have mine" attitude. Both parties are corrupt and I think Obama has been a terrible president (NSA spying, bad domestic leadership, non-existent foreign policy, etc.), but he's miles ahead of McCain and Romney. [SEP] and more tangible issues like exempting fracking companies from clean air & water act regulations.
-Everyone is giving you the exact same response and advice: delete the games. But why? You say you become addicted really fast, why not give yourself a time window to play in (let’s say daily from 1800-2000). This way you don’t have to go cold turkey on your addiction. I don’t have kids. I do have a gf and my own place. Chores first then gaming as usual, do everything you need to do in the house before you start gaming. Speak with your wife about how long she “allows” you to play games. For the record: I play up to 20-30hours a week. I work full time too. [SEP] Speak with your wife about how long she “allows” you to play games.
-If you connected 2 neurons before typing, you would've tried to replace "more" with "less" and see that it made sense in the overall post. Edit: There was a typo but like I said, it was obvious. Btw if you're coming at me on maths level/degrees, you're going to be disappointed... [SEP] If you connected 2 neurons before typing
-I think it would be great if we had a public debate about US policy towards Latin America, and I am confident that if Americans had a better understanding of the political history of Nicaragua, they would generally be supportive of the Sandinistas. Discussing these sort of things is what is supposed to happen in a democracy. [SEP] and I am confident that if Americans had a better understanding of the political history of Nicaragua, they would generally be supportive of the Sandinistas
-If you're serious, he means Delaware. [SEP] If you're serious
-Nice. So as SWTOR gains a couple thousand subs a week it bleeds tens of thousands. No wonder the game is growing. Of course you prolly believe the game still has 1.7 mil subs and has stayed at that number since January because Bioware says so. how adorable [SEP] Of course you prolly believe the game still has 1.7 mil subs and has stayed at that number since January because Bioware says so. how adorable
-A contributing factor is a large addition of adjunct grains (rice or corn in that beer's case). They add simple, highly fermentable sugars with a very flavor-neutral flavor profile. Pair that with a very restrained hop bill and you've got yourself a glass full of "drinkability". And both are a lot cheaper than malted barley. [SEP] And both are a lot cheaper than malted barley.
-"I'm too broke to move" is a pretty flimsy excuse. If you don't want to leave because of family or work or general anxiety, then own it. Otherwise, start saving up and making your plans. Your best bet is to get away from her and move somewhere with a deeper dating pool for you. A bigger city would be better for both purposes. [SEP] "I'm too broke to move" is a pretty flimsy excuse.
-You sound like a conspiracy theorist. I wonder if you would say the same thing about how we should constantly worry about crime every day in and out and talk about it on reddit. "Crime is everywhere, we need to create scientific tools to predict criminals before they act" instead of simply accepting that there will always be a minimum of crime. There will always be a minimum of unemployment but someone out there might be saying "it's solvable, we can have 100% employment, we just need to make up stupid jobs for everyone." These kinds of mentalities of expecting perfection can have its own set of consequences which you fail to realize. I also can't seem to figure out why you've delved into a British accent and a woman fetching tea. Do you think we can also have 100% fuel-efficient oil engines? Perhaps you should waste your time looking into that while we worry about creating new green technologies and electric engines. Everything is an investment in science, why would you invest your time and energy thinking about how "power and corruption is terrible" when you could be doing something more productive and simply acknowledging that this is a problem that won't have a real solution. There will always be governments or authority-figures and there will always be corrupt individuals (who we will reduce with time and education). [SEP] These kinds of mentalities of expecting perfection can have its own set of consequences which you fail to realize.
-> Again, are Baptists members of a cult? My words "Your links MOSTLY referenced cults." > How do you know that your experiences are vastly numerically more than the many personal experience I've had and that have been shared with me over several years. Lol. Because I've BEEN a Christian. I've known hundreds of Christians. I'm involved in multiple Christian organizations. There's simply no way you've had more experiences with Christians than me. it's statistically so unlikely. > How about you go to the atheism subreddit and see for yourself? That famous place where people write things that reflect reality. Hahahahaha. [SEP] That famous place where people write things that reflect reality. Hahahahaha.
-Took a word right out of my mouth. The game was nothing but underwhelming since launch, honestly, I thought people who loved it were desperate for the sci-fi shooter (fake) MMO. I'll just keep my eyes on it without hype. [SEP] I thought people who loved it were desperate for the sci-fi shooter
-> How was he not even slightly OT? When did the thread become about traveling in Asia? The topic was about a stupid play that was demeaning to gamers. It was never "how many countries have you been to?" ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED? ARE YOU ACTUALLY? INB4: hurr durr so mad write with caps. A guy said "life is boring". The guy responded: "no life is good if you do stuff". That's it. That's not off topic. That's not bragging. You and the losers who upvoted you and went on my page to downvote everything I have written are fucking pathetic. Fucking living your lives through fairytales and video game characters. And that is fine. You have a right to be pathetic. But I also have a right to say that you are. >You can't even address any of the points I made because you've been completely dismantled. You serious though? You haven't made any points. You talk about fucking genetics and "well doesn't matter because Asia and America all have the same people you know there is no difference, and I should know because I've been to 4 whole countries!!". I don't even know what to say about stupidity like that. >All you can do is resort to insulting my (wonderful) wife I never did. >Trust me, kiddo And again, being condenscending. Anyone who disagrees with you is a kid. Right? >I can see how hard you're projecting your problems on me. Do you know what that word means? I am not projecting anything. >I mean who has such an emotional tantrum and puts on such a shamefully childish display simply because people don't share his opinion. Are you trolling me? Are you actually retarded? You are actually retarded. You have responded to every message I have made in this thread, even ones not directed to you because you are so mad that I think that life is good. And that the world is nice. Talk about not liking different opinions. >If you have an aneurysm every time someone goes "Well I disagree and here's why" It isn't even close to "Well I disagree and here's why". It's more like "I have really fucking stupid opinions like that the world and real life is shit and I am gonna downvote anyone who says otherwise and say that they are bragging". >you won't make it far in life. Condenscending again. Implying I haven't made anything of my life. Teach me sensei. Teach me how to be as well travelled as you are. Teach me how to play vidya games as well as you do. I envy your life so much. [SEP] And again, being condenscending. Anyone who disagrees with you is a kid. Right?
-> when we refuse to make a strong distinction between rape and sex There isn't one. Rape is a type of sex: non-consensual sex; oppressive sex. > we only have ourselves to blame when a majority of rapists do not believe that what they did was rape. The problem of rape culture arises from confusion and ignorance surrounding the concept of consent---which this insistence on a rare and unusual usage of words isn't helping with. And it creates whole new ambiguities that never existed before. For instance, if 'sex' is taken only to mean 'consensual sex' then there can be no such thing as 'sexual assault' by definition. As a victim of sexual assault, I, and I expect many others, find this term to be the best description of what happened to me. I suppose I should have to invent a new term and stop using this convenient and accurate one that's already well established? > language evolves. if it bothers you so much, you can hide in a hole and lament the fact. The language isn't evolving in the direction that a tiny minority of people are trying to shoehorn it into. In the absence of any real reason or utility to adopt this unorthodox usage, the word 'rape' will continue to carry the meaning that most people (including healthcare facilities and rape counselors) employ with it: non-consensual sex. Attempting to correct people away from using normal language, without offering any compelling reasons to do so isn't going to alter this. It accomplishes nothing but condescension. [SEP] Attempting to correct people away from using normal language, without offering any compelling reasons to do so isn't going to alter this
-> i am talking about desktop composition, not the special case of fullscreen composition As am I. Do you not read the things I write? > However i have not seen it being done (for desktop composition) in any OS I've listed Mutter, Weston and Android. Mutter only uses a primary plane for scanout but switches the buffer which is scanned out when a window is full screen. Weston and Android are using all available overlay planes to composite as much as possible on scanout. In fact, Keith said (and you can see it on one of the slides) that he wants to try to do exactly that for Xorg. So again: Why do you think exclusive fullscreen has any advantages here? > are composed during the scanout (if this is done in a previous step on the video memory or on the fly during the scanout is not important, the important part is that what is sent to the monitor is whatever is the current state of the buffers - even if some applications were in the middle of updating them). sight. Yes it is important. If you render into a framebuffer the order in which the pixels get updated is not guaranteed. Tiling, compression, scheduler, tests and more will make sure that when you actually render to a framebuffer that is being scanned out that the result on the screen is garbage. The only way to avoid this is to finish rendering and then swap buffers or use the scanout engine to do the compositing. I'm sorry, but that's reality. > Also FWIW i'd always prefer tearing and a bit of flickering here and there (assuming it isn't massive and constant) to the latencies introduced by vsync. Seriously? Do I now have to explain why that's completely stupid and makes no sense at all? People like you are the worst. You know too much to be ignorant and too little to actually understand what's going on. [SEP] People like you are the worst. You know too much to be ignorant and too little to actually understand what's going on.
-Do you think people want to be doing these service jobs? When you say "it's somebody's choice" - it's not really much of a choice when it's this, or make no money for his/her family. Anyone who stands two feet from a gas pump all day long in 45+ degree heat will always be a "poor bastard" in my books and I'll do whatever small things I can to make the job a little easier for them. [SEP] when it's this, or make no money
-But I think it's a big mistake to interpret Tim's post as a "character assassination"; it's just pointing out some of the issues with women's participation in the community. (And let's face it, on this count Haskell does poorly even compared many of the other the overwhelmingly male-dominated open-source language communities.) And I don't see what was so scary about the ensuing discussion; again I think we handled it pretty well all-in-all, and I believe it was a positive thing for the community. [SEP] And I don't see what was so scary about the ensuing discussion
->None of these sources give us any information about Jesus' life or his deeds, other than that the figure existed and was executed by the state - something which I never denied in the first place. >Uh, yes you did. This is your exact quote "By the Roman time period, historians were rather prevalent. Emperors, governors, criminal records...these exist and can be pinpointed to almost exact dates. Yet, none exist for Jesus of Nazareth." I meant that there are no records which record anything specific about Jesus. All that we loosely know is that he was a radical preacher who started a movement, perpetuated by Paul, and that he was crucified by the state. I did not deny the existence of Jesus, if you go back to my original post which started this thread, it reads: >Well, to be fair, the general academic view of the Jesus figure was just a miracle working radical apocalyptic preacher who focused a lot of energy on the poor during a politically unstable time. Each Gospel had its own agenda and its own target audience. It's unlikely that Paul ever actually met the man. But, with so little historic data on Jesus, we can't really know what he actually stood for. You have misinterpreted much of what I have said and have attacked everything. All that I meant by the original thing that Q is the best we have is that those sayings are probably the most accurate to being what Jesus really stood for, since they appear more than once in almost identical language. That was it. I wasn't trying to throw it out there because I think it sounds cool, or whatever you think my intentions were. The conversation has still been fun, I always enjoy this subreddit's religious discussions more than the atheist subreddits, but I really dislike your personal style, so I'm just going to leave it at that. I dunno if you are extra abrasive because I am an atheist or if you always talk like that, but it's very offputting. [SEP] The conversation has still been fun, I always enjoy this subreddit's religious discussions more than the atheist subreddits, but I really dislike your personal style, so I'm just going to leave it at that. I dunno if you are extra abrasive because I am an atheist or if you always talk like that, but it's very offputting.
-No response is the clearest message you can get that they don't walk to talk to you. A verbal "no thanks, good luck on your search" is rejection and confrontation that is easily avoided by simply not responding. And its very easy to see who you have messaged: Its called sent messages. [SEP] And its very easy to see who you have messaged: Its called sent messages.
-Short answer: I'm young, reckless, and it will probably be fun. Longer Answer: I find not having the memory of something I have done interesting. Not to mention there will always be pictures and videos, I can't remember one of the most fun nights I have had because of alcohol but my friends remember it. There were videos to prove it happened and we all had a good time so that's good enough for me. An experience is still an experience even if I can hardly remember. It's something I can say I have done and something my friends have been a part of. I also wouldn't make a habit out of it the same way I wouldn't make a habit out of drinking. I just don't see an issue with having a wild night every once in a while [SEP] I'm young, reckless, and it will probably be fun.
+First, sorry for the mess in bestof. The mods there tend to be... thorough in relation to "dramatic" things. I think they take it a little far sometimes (like I'm not sure why they decided to ban you as part of it), which can just end up making the situation worse. > Why are votes suddenly being counted if soft-capping has been in effect. I think you're still understanding the capping to do something different than it actually does. It doesn't make votes stop counting when it's in effect, it just changes the score to be something more like a "relative popularity" number, instead of being an exact reflection of the vote counts. The announcement just didn't have much voting activity for the last couple days, but your post brought some attention back to it again, so it started moving again. You're not going to get banned for disagreeing with the change. People have been banned for doing things like creating many accounts to spam the admin inbox, not just for complaining about it in general. [SEP] We really are interested in feedback, and have multiple things in progress to address some of the most common issues with it.
+I know we're mostly Oregonians here and love to do parochial nonsense like losing our shit about sales tax or having to pump our own gas when traveling, but a quick look at a little place called THE REST OF THE FUCKING COUNTRY will quickly demonstrate that listing taxable goods as [$pre-tax] instead of [$pre-tax + (pre-tax tax-rate)] is bog standard in the US. So, that answers the first question. If my octogenarian grandma in Boca Raton can understand that tax is added to the price of a sweater from Talbot's, then so can you. The answer to the second question is really an extension of the first. Walk into Calyxes and take a look at the menu. The menu displays the prices of the products. Medical users are taxed at 0%. Recreational users are taxed at 25%. In what way is this confusing? The menu shows the price of the item. The advertised price is the price of the item. If it's a product that requires tax, it's taxed at purchase. So, to Portland dispensaries: Please change nothing. Your clientele is capable of learning basic arithmetic, and you would be doing them a dis-service by pandering to their laziness. [SEP] It's just like going over to Vancouver and buying a TV from Best Buy.
+> Yea and those spots with high population density have high violence now don't they. Without guns London is passing NYC in murders. And regarding London, oh wow one of the most dangerous European cities had more murders for a few months than one of the safest American cities, that must mean EU has "high violence". The most dangerous British city has a murder rate 3157% times lower than the most dangerous American city. > Tensions breed violence and the countries that are pointed to as gun free heavens are 90% mono culture. What are you talking about? there are more cultures, more languages, more ethnic groups, more diversity etc in Europe than in the US, how ignorant are you? > They don't have school shootings and we don't have acid attacks. Different problems. Yes the problem is that your mass shootings kill way more than acid attacks [that btw are basically only in the UK, are you forgetting the other 30 countries?] You are brainwashed, I am sorry for you. Sources: - eu average murder rate: http - US murder rate: http - St. Louis murder rate: http - Manchester murder rate: http [SEP] No they don't you ignorant fuck. The EU has a murder rate 535% times lower than the US.
+According to the way you talk French I suppose you're not French, sorry I just assumed you were sinced the music in the video is actually French. My point is that Indila is heavily critized here and you'll more likely hear it sung by 13 years old girl teens in the subway... It's surprising to hear it in a PlanetSide 2 video. I don't know equivalents of that kind of popular music in the USA but it'd be pretty much like using Anaconda from Nicky Minaj. In a serious way. BTW, I personnaly one. [SEP] don't like your video that much but just because I don't think parkour suits PS2 well, apart from that your vid is nicely d
+I told you all the important things, Take communal defense and shattered aegis. If you cant figure it out from there Ill give you a hint, its Dragon hunter/ zeal/ Valor (<- you are taking this traitline basically just for communal defense) If you are still having troubles Feel free to pm me ingame @dinotoss.4810, But play around with it a bit first and see how you like it. [SEP] You should learn your class more my friend. :P
+I take the demolition number as spurious since it's never been sent to bid. It's there "best guess" - and just so happens to be pretty close to the 100M number? Like something that costs 49.99! I mean why pay 60M when you can pay 100M! Also, let's do a thought-experiement: you pay me $40,000 and I'm gonna put in a stage and have acts and it's gonna be so cool - and don't worry about the revenues - just think how cool it will be? SO when can you cut me a check? Of course you would say NO! But lo and behold, when it comes to tax money, somehow we forget, as in the example above, that it's the exact same thing! [SEP] Because you want to have some assurance that you would get your money back and that you are making a smart decision.
+is there any tips you could give for drawing faces and expressions? , and it was about a bunch of CATS but I can't find it anymore :( thanks! edit: nevermind found it here. http i googled facial expressions cat and it was the first link. my google-fu is strong today :o [SEP] i remember seeing something like this about how to draw faces and stuff more realistic
+That feeling of wanting to be dead may linger but it's not gonna be so dramatic like it is right now. Plus your hormones are making you crazy. When they balance out you'll feel better. Might not be till you're around 20 [SEP] You're only 16 calm you tits.
+No, they are mutually exclusive. I tried to soften the explanation because I didn't want to call you a fucking idiot for not understanding what the word "probably" means. I was clearly too polite. Now if you'll stop stroking your reddit argument boner with cliches like "moving the goal posts" I'll tell you exactly how you embarrassed yourself. If you use the words probably and only, it means you know enough to demonstrate what you assert is a near certainty and that there is a clear causal relationship between the the interference and the electoral college outcome. I asked for that proof/argument. That's when you shifted to I don't really know. You can't say you don't know why if you also assert something is probable unless you're too fucking stupid to understand that possible and probable aren't synonyms. And you certainly can't say that only interference could deliver the win if you don't have any explanation for how that causal relationship would work. Understanding this doesn't require more than basic knowledge of the English language. Basic knowledge means that you have to be old enough to use a dictionary and understand very simple sentence structure. If you're older than 13 you should ask your guidance counselor for some remedial help. I am hoping, again I'm being charitable, that your last message was the result of you being embarrassed by your own ignorance and trying to find a way to "act out" to make yourself feel better. I'm sorry if that didn't work out for you. [SEP] You write like a slow preteen and have the maturity of someone a good deal younger than that.
+I've been talking about the importance of representation this whole time, I never even mentioned the Oscars until you brought it up, and when I did I supplied evidence to prove that minorities are grossly under represented in lead roles in film. I've also never specified myself to be talking selectively about Black Americans, but repeated that I'm speaking about minorities multiple times. In future, try actually comprehending what's being said to you before responding. You'll find it a lot less embarrassing. [SEP] No, not entirely. And I never said I did.
+>Not that it matters, but she has given her reasons To the extent that she is not breaking up with someone who has brought up (and clearly wants) marriage, it does matter a great deal. This is an example of a couple clearly trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. That's fine, it is their relationship. But, if it is ever going to be a healthy one there needs to be understanding going both ways. This is a relationship (for now) between two specific people with individualized wants and needs. [SEP] I have no clue how this has anything to do with "societal norms".
+But you're only 17, right? So you're still a kid who hasn't really lived yet and didn't have to live through difficult circumstances. It's okay, I was narrowminded like that as well when I was that age. The more you grow up, the more you'll realize that's not the way the world works. [SEP] . So it's easy to have a simplistic black-and-white view of things
+My solution for this sub was to stop playing games that they hate. - Even you must agree that makes sense. Your solution for me was to leave this sub because... - yeah, no sense at all. [SEP] i commented exactly that, on that one guy?
+Your post whining about people not using the FAQ is actually 37 characters longer than the information contained in the relevant portion of the FAQ. The FAQ is poor quality. If OP's question is novice enough that he needs to consult the FAQ, then the FAQ probably isn't going to help: either it will lack necessary information, be poorly sorted, links to pertinent information will be broken, I tried to use the FAQ when I first started and found it to be almost completely useless. The most good I found from it was figuring out what I should google elsewhere or look up on other fora. Unfortunately I'm still a novice myself, because if veteran users spent half as much time improving the readability, usability, learning curve, and depth of the FAQ as they spend bitching at people to use it in every thread, we'd be able to greatly reduce the amount of time the rabblers and whiners have to spend rabbling and whining about people not reading the FAQ. [SEP] or it will be written above his level.
+Yeah. Thought you'd do that. :) Saudi Arabia - . You aren't being much of a lawyer. I'd love to see the looks you would get trying to bring that in to court. There's no wikileak connecting a specific businessman with specific support for al queda. There is the well known fact that factions in Saudi Arabia (even within the house of saud) support al queda and a well known fact that the US does business with Saudi Arabia. 1) No one needed a wiki leak to know those facts. 2) That does not constitute treason, just a shitty world with a necessity for real politik. Spying UN international law - As you will happily be told by anyone with knowledge, there is no constitutional requirement to obey international law (well, customary international law. Ratified treaties are enforceable under US law). Espionage is also a normal part of statecraft. It is not remotely unconstitutional. Cluster bombs - this is a UK internal problem concerning a treaty to which the US is not a signatory. Not unconstitutional. Bombing of Yemen - authorised by Congress through the Authorisation of the Use of Military Force Resolution. Non remotely unconstitutional. You can look through this thread for other commentary on that (ctrl+F AUMF) or just google. The fact that the US is letting the Yemeni government take credit/blame for it is not unconstitutional. Kidnapping - This was the one I agreed with. Everything about extraordinary rendition and detainment without trial is likely in violation of the constitution. We hardly needed Wikileaks to tell us about this though. Al-Masri was in the Los Angeles Times on 2008 and it's a matter of public record. You want to find constitutional violations so you are bending the law and the facts to fit what you want to see. I have the advantage of not caring. I'm just looking at the facts on the ground. [SEP] Not treason and we both know it
+I'm a gun owning Obama voter. We do exist. Let me explain my approach: I don't affiliate with either party. I see 2A rights as a civil rights issue. I sit left of center on most issues, but can't bring myself to vote for Republicans on the federal level for the following reasons (among others): The party is in the middle of an absurd voter disenfranchisement effort. The party has backwards stances on a whole slew of women's rights issues. The party believes in corporate personhood. The party has backwards stances on a whole slew of environmental issues. This includes global warning (Nixon created the EPA, btw.) The party opposes Obamacare and does not offer any viable alternatives. Lack of access to health coverage is a real issue. Let's also remember that poor people get a "free" ride at the ER because of the Republican patron saint, Ronald Reagan. ...and the general "fuck you I have mine" attitude. Both parties are corrupt and I think Obama has been a terrible president (NSA spying, bad domestic leadership, non-existent foreign policy, etc.), but he's miles ahead of McCain and Romney. [SEP] and more tangible issues like exempting fracking companies from clean air & water act regulations.
+Everyone is giving you the exact same response and advice: delete the games. But why? You say you become addicted really fast, why not give yourself a time window to play in (let’s say daily from 1800-2000). This way you don’t have to go cold turkey on your addiction. I don’t have kids. I do have a gf and my own place. Chores first then gaming as usual, do everything you need to do in the house before you start gaming. For the record: I play up to 20-30hours a week. I work full time too. [SEP] Speak with your wife about how long she “allows” you to play games.
+, you would've tried to replace "more" with "less" and see that it made sense in the overall post. Edit: There was a typo but like I said, it was obvious. Btw if you're coming at me on maths level/degrees, you're going to be disappointed... [SEP] If you connected 2 neurons before typing
+I think it would be great if we had a public debate about US policy towards Latin America, . Discussing these sort of things is what is supposed to happen in a democracy. [SEP] and I am confident that if Americans had a better understanding of the political history of Nicaragua, they would generally be supportive of the Sandinistas
+, he means Delaware. [SEP] If you're serious
+Nice. So as SWTOR gains a couple thousand subs a week it bleeds tens of thousands. No wonder the game is growing. [SEP] Of course you prolly believe the game still has 1.7 mil subs and has stayed at that number since January because Bioware says so. how adorable
+A contributing factor is a large addition of adjunct grains (rice or corn in that beer's case). They add simple, highly fermentable sugars with a very flavor-neutral flavor profile. Pair that with a very restrained hop bill and you've got yourself a glass full of "drinkability". [SEP] And both are a lot cheaper than malted barley.
+If you don't want to leave because of family or work or general anxiety, then own it. Otherwise, start saving up and making your plans. Your best bet is to get away from her and move somewhere with a deeper dating pool for you. A bigger city would be better for both purposes. [SEP] "I'm too broke to move" is a pretty flimsy excuse.
+You sound like a conspiracy theorist. I wonder if you would say the same thing about how we should constantly worry about crime every day in and out and talk about it on reddit. "Crime is everywhere, we need to create scientific tools to predict criminals before they act" instead of simply accepting that there will always be a minimum of crime. There will always be a minimum of unemployment but someone out there might be saying "it's solvable, we can have 100% employment, we just need to make up stupid jobs for everyone." I also can't seem to figure out why you've delved into a British accent and a woman fetching tea. Do you think we can also have 100% fuel-efficient oil engines? Perhaps you should waste your time looking into that while we worry about creating new green technologies and electric engines. Everything is an investment in science, why would you invest your time and energy thinking about how "power and corruption is terrible" when you could be doing something more productive and simply acknowledging that this is a problem that won't have a real solution. There will always be governments or authority-figures and there will always be corrupt individuals (who we will reduce with time and education). [SEP] These kinds of mentalities of expecting perfection can have its own set of consequences which you fail to realize.
+> Again, are Baptists members of a cult? My words "Your links MOSTLY referenced cults." > How do you know that your experiences are vastly numerically more than the many personal experience I've had and that have been shared with me over several years. Lol. Because I've BEEN a Christian. I've known hundreds of Christians. I'm involved in multiple Christian organizations. There's simply no way you've had more experiences with Christians than me. it's statistically so unlikely. > How about you go to the atheism subreddit and see for yourself? [SEP] That famous place where people write things that reflect reality. Hahahahaha.
+Took a word right out of my mouth. The game was nothing but underwhelming since launch, honestly, (fake) MMO. I'll just keep my eyes on it without hype. [SEP] I thought people who loved it were desperate for the sci-fi shooter
+> How was he not even slightly OT? When did the thread become about traveling in Asia? The topic was about a stupid play that was demeaning to gamers. It was never "how many countries have you been to?" ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED? ARE YOU ACTUALLY? INB4: hurr durr so mad write with caps. A guy said "life is boring". The guy responded: "no life is good if you do stuff". That's it. That's not off topic. That's not bragging. You and the losers who upvoted you and went on my page to downvote everything I have written are fucking pathetic. Fucking living your lives through fairytales and video game characters. And that is fine. You have a right to be pathetic. But I also have a right to say that you are. >You can't even address any of the points I made because you've been completely dismantled. You serious though? You haven't made any points. You talk about fucking genetics and "well doesn't matter because Asia and America all have the same people you know there is no difference, and I should know because I've been to 4 whole countries!!". I don't even know what to say about stupidity like that. >All you can do is resort to insulting my (wonderful) wife I never did. >Trust me, kiddo >I can see how hard you're projecting your problems on me. Do you know what that word means? I am not projecting anything. >I mean who has such an emotional tantrum and puts on such a shamefully childish display simply because people don't share his opinion. Are you trolling me? Are you actually retarded? You are actually retarded. You have responded to every message I have made in this thread, even ones not directed to you because you are so mad that I think that life is good. And that the world is nice. Talk about not liking different opinions. >If you have an aneurysm every time someone goes "Well I disagree and here's why" It isn't even close to "Well I disagree and here's why". It's more like "I have really fucking stupid opinions like that the world and real life is shit and I am gonna downvote anyone who says otherwise and say that they are bragging". >you won't make it far in life. Condenscending again. Implying I haven't made anything of my life. Teach me sensei. Teach me how to be as well travelled as you are. Teach me how to play vidya games as well as you do. I envy your life so much. [SEP] And again, being condenscending. Anyone who disagrees with you is a kid. Right?
+> when we refuse to make a strong distinction between rape and sex There isn't one. Rape is a type of sex: non-consensual sex; oppressive sex. > we only have ourselves to blame when a majority of rapists do not believe that what they did was rape. The problem of rape culture arises from confusion and ignorance surrounding the concept of consent---which this insistence on a rare and unusual usage of words isn't helping with. And it creates whole new ambiguities that never existed before. For instance, if 'sex' is taken only to mean 'consensual sex' then there can be no such thing as 'sexual assault' by definition. As a victim of sexual assault, I, and I expect many others, find this term to be the best description of what happened to me. I suppose I should have to invent a new term and stop using this convenient and accurate one that's already well established? > language evolves. if it bothers you so much, you can hide in a hole and lament the fact. The language isn't evolving in the direction that a tiny minority of people are trying to shoehorn it into. In the absence of any real reason or utility to adopt this unorthodox usage, the word 'rape' will continue to carry the meaning that most people (including healthcare facilities and rape counselors) employ with it: non-consensual sex. . It accomplishes nothing but condescension. [SEP] Attempting to correct people away from using normal language, without offering any compelling reasons to do so isn't going to alter this
+> i am talking about desktop composition, not the special case of fullscreen composition As am I. Do you not read the things I write? > However i have not seen it being done (for desktop composition) in any OS I've listed Mutter, Weston and Android. Mutter only uses a primary plane for scanout but switches the buffer which is scanned out when a window is full screen. Weston and Android are using all available overlay planes to composite as much as possible on scanout. In fact, Keith said (and you can see it on one of the slides) that he wants to try to do exactly that for Xorg. So again: Why do you think exclusive fullscreen has any advantages here? > are composed during the scanout (if this is done in a previous step on the video memory or on the fly during the scanout is not important, the important part is that what is sent to the monitor is whatever is the current state of the buffers - even if some applications were in the middle of updating them). sight. Yes it is important. If you render into a framebuffer the order in which the pixels get updated is not guaranteed. Tiling, compression, scheduler, tests and more will make sure that when you actually render to a framebuffer that is being scanned out that the result on the screen is garbage. The only way to avoid this is to finish rendering and then swap buffers or use the scanout engine to do the compositing. I'm sorry, but that's reality. > Also FWIW i'd always prefer tearing and a bit of flickering here and there (assuming it isn't massive and constant) to the latencies introduced by vsync. Seriously? Do I now have to explain why that's completely stupid and makes no sense at all? [SEP] People like you are the worst. You know too much to be ignorant and too little to actually understand what's going on.
+Do you think people want to be doing these service jobs? When you say "it's somebody's choice" - it's not really much of a choice for his/her family. Anyone who stands two feet from a gas pump all day long in 45+ degree heat will always be a "poor bastard" in my books and I'll do whatever small things I can to make the job a little easier for them. [SEP] when it's this, or make no money
+But I think it's a big mistake to interpret Tim's post as a "character assassination"; it's just pointing out some of the issues with women's participation in the community. (And let's face it, on this count Haskell does poorly even compared many of the other the overwhelmingly male-dominated open-source language communities.) ; again I think we handled it pretty well all-in-all, and I believe it was a positive thing for the community. [SEP] And I don't see what was so scary about the ensuing discussion
+>None of these sources give us any information about Jesus' life or his deeds, other than that the figure existed and was executed by the state - something which I never denied in the first place. >Uh, yes you did. This is your exact quote "By the Roman time period, historians were rather prevalent. Emperors, governors, criminal records...these exist and can be pinpointed to almost exact dates. Yet, none exist for Jesus of Nazareth." I meant that there are no records which record anything specific about Jesus. All that we loosely know is that he was a radical preacher who started a movement, perpetuated by Paul, and that he was crucified by the state. I did not deny the existence of Jesus, if you go back to my original post which started this thread, it reads: >Well, to be fair, the general academic view of the Jesus figure was just a miracle working radical apocalyptic preacher who focused a lot of energy on the poor during a politically unstable time. Each Gospel had its own agenda and its own target audience. It's unlikely that Paul ever actually met the man. But, with so little historic data on Jesus, we can't really know what he actually stood for. You have misinterpreted much of what I have said and have attacked everything. All that I meant by the original thing that Q is the best we have is that those sayings are probably the most accurate to being what Jesus really stood for, since they appear more than once in almost identical language. That was it. I wasn't trying to throw it out there because I think it sounds cool, or whatever you think my intentions were. [SEP] The conversation has still been fun, I always enjoy this subreddit's religious discussions more than the atheist subreddits, but I really dislike your personal style, so I'm just going to leave it at that. I dunno if you are extra abrasive because I am an atheist or if you always talk like that, but it's very offputting.
+No response is the clearest message you can get that they don't walk to talk to you. A verbal "no thanks, good luck on your search" is rejection and confrontation that is easily avoided by simply not responding. [SEP] And its very easy to see who you have messaged: Its called sent messages.
+Short answer: Longer Answer: I find not having the memory of something I have done interesting. Not to mention there will always be pictures and videos, I can't remember one of the most fun nights I have had because of alcohol but my friends remember it. There were videos to prove it happened and we all had a good time so that's good enough for me. An experience is still an experience even if I can hardly remember. It's something I can say I have done and something my friends have been a part of. I also wouldn't make a habit out of it the same way I wouldn't make a habit out of drinking. I just don't see an issue with having a wild night every once in a while [SEP] I'm young, reckless, and it will probably be fun.
 So the point of consent is not that someone is capable of saying yes but that they are competent to say yes in an ongoing process. Capable and competent are extremely different things. Competent includes a much broader collection of issues than whether someone is sufficiently conscious to utter the word yes at some point, or a thought experiment about what they really wanted and the alcohol made happen. It means if they are in more or less complete control of their actions, aware of their current circumstances, and possessing a reasonable knowledge of the consequences of those actions. Competency within a legal framework is usually the simplest way to instruct on it since there are uncontroversial examples to use. Someone is not competent when being blackmailed because they are not in control of their actions. A contract cannot be valid when the participants have hid salient details of either one participants current situation (someone not telling a mortgage dealer they are in debt), or the consequences of the contract from each other (hidden fees or misleading claims). Assuming OP is telling the truth about their alcohol consumption: Someone who is so shittered that they snap into consciousness unaware of who they are being fucked by (not having sex with, since they are an unequal participant) is not competent to provide consent in that situation. If she is drunk to the point where she is not in full control of herself (blackout), she is not competent to consent. If she has unconscious she is no longer competent to consent. That is his problem with judgement, not hers. Since it's usually really easy to tell if someone is drunk to the point of lacking competence (they'll tell you, smell like it, or be clearly incoherent), he is either a deliberate predator, or an accidental one. As to your concern about a bright line, there is a bright line: all sex in which one or more partners are not competent is rape. If you doubt the competency of your sexual partner, don't rape them. If you enter into an agreement before hand, while competent, and continue sex where one or more partners are no longer competent, you must acknowledge the risk and you shouldn't do it unless you trust that person not to press charges against you. If you think normal sex involves incompetent people, you need to reevaluate your definition of normal sex, not ask a legal or feminist framework to jump through hoops to accommodate your predatory behaviour. As an aside, none of this is controversial or new. Instead of sitting idly on the internet hoping someone will change your mind, do your curiousity a favour and actually investigate these questions. The world is a lot less terrifying when you actually investigate it, and that includes sex within the radical new world of not raping people... [SEP] As an aside, none of this is controversial or new. Instead of sitting idly on the internet hoping someone will change your mind, do your curiousity a favour and actually investigate these questions. The world is a lot less terrifying when you actually investigate it, and that includes sex within the radical new world of not raping people...
-You really were just skim reading what I posted to feel good about yourself from a holier-than-thou position weren't you? One year as in the final year of high school. I like how you just infer I was a lifelong shit student. I had no accommodations made for me. I over achieved the year before by taking extra classes + extracurricular things and gave myself the buffer zone. In Canada, even high school is divided into semesters. If you had accommodations made for you, that's your deal. I didn't, I got zeros just like any other student. I was allowed to write tests if I wasn't there that day but so was any other student. If you're able to attend half your college classes and pass with stellar marks I am genuinely impressed by you because that's more than I could pull off. Also theres a huge disconnect here because you're comparing your time in university to mine in high school when the very premise of my original statement is that they're hardly comparable. I hope I dont ever need your professional services. [SEP] One year as in the final year of high school.
-Not with your attitude you're not. If you stopped to actually think you'd realize why your opinion is downplayed. Hint: it wasn't just Riot's decision. Mindless anti-Riot mouth-frothing doesn't make you look too smart. [SEP] Hint: it wasn't just Riot's decision. Mindless anti-Riot mouth-frothing doesn't make you look too smart.
->And why QUAIL? >Every human has a drastically different series of sexual experiences. Saying that there is a clinical correlation between human cocaine use and high risk sexual activity...well there are a LOT of things out there that correlate with increases in high risk sexual activity. Humans almost never use just one drug, they do it at different times and in different amounts. In order to really determine how cocaine specifically impacts sexual behavior, you need to reduce the variables, which means you need a model. Drugs of abuse like cocaine have similar brain effects in various species, so you have your pick, but in this case, quail is a very good choice. While there aren't as many established studies in quail as opposed to, say, rats and mice, quail have a VERY stereotypical mating pattern. >>The males in particular are highly motivated to mateguard and to mate with female quail. They demonstrate mateguarding by sitting near a female quail and they will do this for hours, even days. This is part of their natural sexual behavior pattern. It is relevant to human behavior in the sense that some drugs, including cocaine, enhance this behavior, thereby modelling the enhanced sexual motivation that occurs with humans during drug use. >Not only that, while rodents are very strongly influenced by olfactory cues, quail are visually oriented, which makes them, in this way, more similar to humans (though there is some evidence for olfactory cues, and there's some evidence for that in humans as well). You can train them to work with visual cues, and look at motivation to mate using those cues. The scientists have already trained quail in these studies to 'mateguard' in response to a cue signaling a female is about to appear, and have shown that cocaine makes this behavior more difficult to extinguish. These studies can help to show what aspects of sexual behavior are specifically targeted in quail given cocaine, and help us to translate these studies to humans further down the line. The scientists also intend to study both male AND female responses. This is another good reason to use quail, while females do not mateguard, they do "squat" to show receptivity, making changes in female sexual response much easier to see (compared to rodents, for example). Source: The article you apparently didn't read [SEP] Source: The article you apparently didn't read
->I fucking sure can. Enjoy being willfully wrong, then. You're free to do as you please. >The democrats don't give a fuck about me or my future so fuck them. Let it burn. They brought this shit on themselves. Good riddance "If I don't get what I exactly what I want, then fuck you!" Okay. This mindset is any different than what the GOP and Dems are currently doing, how? You have to be willing to make concessions from time to time. Progress is slow. This type of rhetoric is only hurting our platform. [SEP] "If I don't get what I exactly what I want, then fuck you!"
-That's great for your little circle of friends. I know plenty of people who are still playing the "I'm voting for a WOMAN PRESIDENT!!" card. [SEP] your little circle of friends
-I'm still confused about this "narrow minded worldview" you're talking about. Who cares if an MTV ad that targets the US specifically has a US-centric worldview. That's OK, isn't it? I'm not sure how you have access to the intent of the video. That said, I agree that it's clumsy, and that while it may not mean to, it does tend to inflame white guys with what appears to be an ad hominem stereotyping. But then, as a white guy, why should my reaction be to be dismissive of the video? And more to the point: why on earth should I be angry or think that the message is "idiotic," which the title of this post seems to suggest? [SEP] or think that the message is "idiotic,"
-I'll ignore that reality dictates words and not the other way around for a bit to make this comment, doing as much as you think is required because at a certain point living up to your impossible standards becomes too hard does not make a very good moral system. You say to someone who eats meat that you do more than them, so you are morally superior, but as soon as that is said of you, it becomes impractical. Said another way, I am more morally superior than people who go around killing and eating other people, so my position on eating animals is just fine. Also, whose to say that "as far as possible and practicable" is with eating no animal products? People have caused themselves harm while doing a vegan diet correctly, so for them, eating meat is their limit. [SEP] You say to someone who eats meat that you do more than them, so you are morally superior
-Let's stop with this who and where question. It was used to great effect all summer to dismiss people. Let's not look out side, lets look in. Giroud is not the best striker on Earth. Anyone who thinks he is needs their head examined. If you accept that as a reality then you accept there are better strikers out there. It's not my job to find them, all I can do is look at my team. We have no backup for said below top notch striker, that too is a deficiency. Jenkinson, Bendtner, Monreal...all players that are not good enough. As back up to top talent? Fair enough, apart from Bendtner, he really needs to go. Could we, like Chelsea did to us, send out a second team that could possibly hold their own if not defeat the league leaders? Hell no. But you still don't believe we need more players? Seriously?! [SEP] But you still don't believe we need more players? Seriously?!
+You really were just skim reading what I posted to feel good about yourself from a holier-than-thou position weren't you? I like how you just infer I was a lifelong shit student. I had no accommodations made for me. I over achieved the year before by taking extra classes + extracurricular things and gave myself the buffer zone. In Canada, even high school is divided into semesters. If you had accommodations made for you, that's your deal. I didn't, I got zeros just like any other student. I was allowed to write tests if I wasn't there that day but so was any other student. If you're able to attend half your college classes and pass with stellar marks I am genuinely impressed by you because that's more than I could pull off. Also theres a huge disconnect here because you're comparing your time in university to mine in high school when the very premise of my original statement is that they're hardly comparable. I hope I dont ever need your professional services. [SEP] One year as in the final year of high school.
+Not with your attitude you're not. If you stopped to actually think you'd realize why your opinion is downplayed. [SEP] Hint: it wasn't just Riot's decision. Mindless anti-Riot mouth-frothing doesn't make you look too smart.
+>And why QUAIL? >Every human has a drastically different series of sexual experiences. Saying that there is a clinical correlation between human cocaine use and high risk sexual activity...well there are a LOT of things out there that correlate with increases in high risk sexual activity. Humans almost never use just one drug, they do it at different times and in different amounts. In order to really determine how cocaine specifically impacts sexual behavior, you need to reduce the variables, which means you need a model. Drugs of abuse like cocaine have similar brain effects in various species, so you have your pick, but in this case, quail is a very good choice. While there aren't as many established studies in quail as opposed to, say, rats and mice, quail have a VERY stereotypical mating pattern. >>The males in particular are highly motivated to mateguard and to mate with female quail. They demonstrate mateguarding by sitting near a female quail and they will do this for hours, even days. This is part of their natural sexual behavior pattern. It is relevant to human behavior in the sense that some drugs, including cocaine, enhance this behavior, thereby modelling the enhanced sexual motivation that occurs with humans during drug use. >Not only that, while rodents are very strongly influenced by olfactory cues, quail are visually oriented, which makes them, in this way, more similar to humans (though there is some evidence for olfactory cues, and there's some evidence for that in humans as well). You can train them to work with visual cues, and look at motivation to mate using those cues. The scientists have already trained quail in these studies to 'mateguard' in response to a cue signaling a female is about to appear, and have shown that cocaine makes this behavior more difficult to extinguish. These studies can help to show what aspects of sexual behavior are specifically targeted in quail given cocaine, and help us to translate these studies to humans further down the line. The scientists also intend to study both male AND female responses. This is another good reason to use quail, while females do not mateguard, they do "squat" to show receptivity, making changes in female sexual response much easier to see (compared to rodents, for example). [SEP] Source: The article you apparently didn't read
+>I fucking sure can. Enjoy being willfully wrong, then. You're free to do as you please. >The democrats don't give a fuck about me or my future so fuck them. Let it burn. They brought this shit on themselves. Good riddance Okay. This mindset is any different than what the GOP and Dems are currently doing, how? You have to be willing to make concessions from time to time. Progress is slow. This type of rhetoric is only hurting our platform. [SEP] "If I don't get what I exactly what I want, then fuck you!"
+That's great for . I know plenty of people who are still playing the "I'm voting for a WOMAN PRESIDENT!!" card. [SEP] your little circle of friends
+I'm still confused about this "narrow minded worldview" you're talking about. Who cares if an MTV ad that targets the US specifically has a US-centric worldview. That's OK, isn't it? I'm not sure how you have access to the intent of the video. That said, I agree that it's clumsy, and that while it may not mean to, it does tend to inflame white guys with what appears to be an ad hominem stereotyping. But then, as a white guy, why should my reaction be to be dismissive of the video? And more to the point: why on earth should I be angry which the title of this post seems to suggest? [SEP] or think that the message is "idiotic,"
+I'll ignore that reality dictates words and not the other way around for a bit to make this comment, doing as much as you think is required because at a certain point living up to your impossible standards becomes too hard does not make a very good moral system. , but as soon as that is said of you, it becomes impractical. Said another way, I am more morally superior than people who go around killing and eating other people, so my position on eating animals is just fine. Also, whose to say that "as far as possible and practicable" is with eating no animal products? People have caused themselves harm while doing a vegan diet correctly, so for them, eating meat is their limit. [SEP] You say to someone who eats meat that you do more than them, so you are morally superior
+Let's stop with this who and where question. It was used to great effect all summer to dismiss people. Let's not look out side, lets look in. Giroud is not the best striker on Earth. Anyone who thinks he is needs their head examined. If you accept that as a reality then you accept there are better strikers out there. It's not my job to find them, all I can do is look at my team. We have no backup for said below top notch striker, that too is a deficiency. Jenkinson, Bendtner, Monreal...all players that are not good enough. As back up to top talent? Fair enough, apart from Bendtner, he really needs to go. Could we, like Chelsea did to us, send out a second team that could possibly hold their own if not defeat the league leaders? Hell no. [SEP] But you still don't believe we need more players? Seriously?!
 Until you've got a candidate on the Federal ticket in all 50 states you're just a fringe group. And a nut-filled one at that. [SEP] Until you've got a candidate on the Federal ticket in all 50 states you're just a nut-filled fringe group
-Oh. I had no idea that you didn't know that physical contact between people is something special and private. I couldn't imagine that you didn't know that concept. Well then. When you feel close to someone, sometimes, you want to make physical contact with them. This part of a relationship is intimate, meaning that it is only between those two people and not shared with the world. Physical contact is a special thing that typically is done in somewhat private situations. Kissing is an example of a physical contact that might be done in public. Some people sconsider a quick kiss to be appropriate and even cute, while the same people wouldn't openly french kiss in public, because that is displaying an intimate part of a relationship in public. Some people are exhibitionists and want to be seen, some are not. Those few exhibitionists don't have much public in day to day life. Some voyeurs might want to see them, but these are few and far in between. Since intimate physical contact between two person is mostly done in private, most people external to the couple don't want to see this intimate contact seen in public. It puts them in an uncomfortable position because such contact is intimate and is seen as private. Some people think that this private and intimate contact should be forced upon others when they don't want to see it. The keyword here is "forced" and I use it in an extreme manner. Of course those exhibitionists don't think that they are forcing their public, merely doing something extremely personal in front of others that could "look away". Since the vast majority of people understand that being in a closed room with other entails actually not offending others (or making them look away), they will refrain from public displays of affection. Now the workplace. Most workplaces have multiple people coexisting under various circumstances, most of which include sharing enclosed spaces with people which are not friends or family. 100% of these people are there in order to gain a salary. Making various types of people work together is a complicated thing. Physical and moral limits have to be put in place because surprisingly, some people don't want to "fit in" and take their coworkers limits into consideration. Most would agree that physical displays of affection are a private thing, only shared between two very close people. The very intimate action of touching a loved one can put other at unease. Some of those could be uneasy because they recently have had their heart broken so there suddenly is emotional turmoil when they're trying to work, preventing them from focusing on work, the reason they are there for. Other uneasy people might be people that have received unwanted physical contact in their lives and since about 1 women in 5 have had to go through this at one point or other in their life, it's quite easy to see why intimate and private physical contact might disturb them. Most people would agree that "minding" their coworker's limits and desires is an intricate part of having to work together. Still some people believe that their own viewpoint trumps collective agreement. Does people then are seen as inconsiderate of others. They don't want collective limits put in place. They can't conceive that their own desires are not accepted by people around them. no matter which way you are trying to explain to them that private and intimate physical contact should not be forced upon their coworkers, they don't give a damn. They want the world to spell out to them each and every way that other people ARE offended. They cannot conceive that some people might be inconvenienced without asking them about it. Some might even think that it would be a good thing that their personal limits should apply or be debated. They are so close minded that people with different standards to them are "assholes" and "stupidly offended". Those people are assholes. To prevent those people from causing chaos and trouble in the workplace, we have to put rules in place to force these people to adhere to a reasonnable amount of social limits that pleases most. [SEP] Oh. I had no idea that you didn't know that physical contact between people is something special and private
-> It's a tiny, tiny fraction of the population. So tiny that traces of cocaine now shows up in the water supply of the UK. To me its all walks of life i go to, friends i grew up with, friends i went to university with, friends from work ( i do work in television so that might have something to do with it), my parents friends do it, i used to work in a pub where i would regularly catch people doing it, it seems normal to see a queue of people waiting to do coke in most bars i go to. Its more than just 'my bubble' Source on the water supply claim; http [SEP] Its more than just 'my bubble'
-Except it's a specific thing done by men to women BECAUSE they are women. Whether you like it or not, the issue IS gendered. [SEP] BECAUSE they are women
-Whoa whoa whoa, let's not get upset about it. Like I said, I'm not bashing it. I said that I don't relate to almost everything on here, which is why I called myself an "alien". [SEP] Whoa whoa whoa, let's not get upset about it.
->The arguments assume that the subject is incapable of empathy, and is actively attempting to hold to these 'privileges' and keep them away from everyone else. That's simply not the case. Except that's not the argument at all. The argument is that privilege is difficult to recognize because it's based on deeply ingrained assumptions about race, gender, etc., and that if you possess privilege you need to be conscious of it. >black men don't need to lock their doors when they roll through the ghetto, women aren't seen as creepy when they ask someone out - good, why is this a bad thing? In an ideal world, everyone would feel safe walking or driving in any part of town at any time, and no one would be treated as a creeper for expressing interest in another, and so forth. The first isn't true and the second isn't an example of privilege. It's not exclusive; if you wanted you could do the same thing. It doesn't really give women power in the sense that's meant when people talk about privilege. I have never known a woman who called a guy creepy just because he asked her out. I would argue that if you asked a woman out without at least some kind of engaging conversation under your belt then it would be pretty creepy. And anyway, doesn't a woman get to decide whether or not an advance is creepy? >This isn't an ideal world - that may suck when situations where we don't have such 'privilege' are encountered, but that's life. Being able to say privilege is 'just a fact of life' is an example of privilege. >Worse, these arguments require, by necessity, the outlook of a societal parasite. Rather than working to change things or make their own situation better, these people want to shame others for what they themselves don't have. What exactly is parasitic about, for example, wanting people not to think your natural hair is weird? Or, not having to justify having a "funny" name?. Or, being able to get hired despite having a "funny" name? Or, asking for proportional attention and context to be given when discussing issues that are used to dismiss all of the problems in your community? You seem to think of privilege as some kind of interpersonal welfare, when really it's about calling attention to the blind assumptions that reinforce harmful power structure. And contrary to your point, when people point it out they're assuming you're a good person who can change their behavior and think and act more fairly. The rhetoric gets inflamed sometimes, but frankly some people are tired of having a one in ten chance of being murdered. And anyway, rhetoric gets heated for any subject; why is it only an issue when the discussion is over privilege? [SEP] privilege is difficult to recognize because it's based on deeply ingrained assumptions about race, gender, etc.
-Have you read the passage? What parts of it do you believe tell Christians that they need to maintain the status quo? [SEP] Have you read the passage?
-Yes, Helen Keller did mention that her deafness had more of a negative impact on her life than her blindness. If I remember correctly she said that this was because deafness was the more isolating of the two: it kept her out of the company of other people and inhibited her from a totally free expression of her thoughts, and understanding of others'. (Though I'm not sure how she could fairly imagine what it might have been like to be only deaf or only blind, so it must have been difficult for her to accurately answer which one was "worse" for her.) What bothers me isn't that she's seen as a famous or inspirational figure, but that most people don't know of her beyond the fact that she was deafblind. Helen Keller was also a suffragette and a staunch pacifist. Her political leaning was radically socialist (especially for her times), she advocated for women's rights (particularly with regard to the availability of birth control), was a founding member of the ACLU, traveled widely, and was highly educated. She wrote about a dozen books and even more essays... and yet most people gloss over those contributions entirely. Yeah, she was close friends with AG Bell, and yeah, you can certainly pull quotations out of the context of her life and her experiences and view them as an indictment of the Deaf community. She wasn't shy about sharing her opinions, that much is certain. But from what I've seen? The people who really hold her up as a role model are hearing, able-bodied people who are too focused on the "supercrip" storyline and don't actually know that much about who she was or what she stood for. [SEP] (Though I'm not sure how she could fairly imagine what it might have been like to be only deaf or only blind, so it must have been difficult for her to accurately answer which one was "worse" for her.)
+. I couldn't imagine that you didn't know that concept. Well then. When you feel close to someone, sometimes, you want to make physical contact with them. This part of a relationship is intimate, meaning that it is only between those two people and not shared with the world. Physical contact is a special thing that typically is done in somewhat private situations. Kissing is an example of a physical contact that might be done in public. Some people sconsider a quick kiss to be appropriate and even cute, while the same people wouldn't openly french kiss in public, because that is displaying an intimate part of a relationship in public. Some people are exhibitionists and want to be seen, some are not. Those few exhibitionists don't have much public in day to day life. Some voyeurs might want to see them, but these are few and far in between. Since intimate physical contact between two person is mostly done in private, most people external to the couple don't want to see this intimate contact seen in public. It puts them in an uncomfortable position because such contact is intimate and is seen as private. Some people think that this private and intimate contact should be forced upon others when they don't want to see it. The keyword here is "forced" and I use it in an extreme manner. Of course those exhibitionists don't think that they are forcing their public, merely doing something extremely personal in front of others that could "look away". Since the vast majority of people understand that being in a closed room with other entails actually not offending others (or making them look away), they will refrain from public displays of affection. Now the workplace. Most workplaces have multiple people coexisting under various circumstances, most of which include sharing enclosed spaces with people which are not friends or family. 100% of these people are there in order to gain a salary. Making various types of people work together is a complicated thing. Physical and moral limits have to be put in place because surprisingly, some people don't want to "fit in" and take their coworkers limits into consideration. Most would agree that physical displays of affection are a private thing, only shared between two very close people. The very intimate action of touching a loved one can put other at unease. Some of those could be uneasy because they recently have had their heart broken so there suddenly is emotional turmoil when they're trying to work, preventing them from focusing on work, the reason they are there for. Other uneasy people might be people that have received unwanted physical contact in their lives and since about 1 women in 5 have had to go through this at one point or other in their life, it's quite easy to see why intimate and private physical contact might disturb them. Most people would agree that "minding" their coworker's limits and desires is an intricate part of having to work together. Still some people believe that their own viewpoint trumps collective agreement. Does people then are seen as inconsiderate of others. They don't want collective limits put in place. They can't conceive that their own desires are not accepted by people around them. no matter which way you are trying to explain to them that private and intimate physical contact should not be forced upon their coworkers, they don't give a damn. They want the world to spell out to them each and every way that other people ARE offended. They cannot conceive that some people might be inconvenienced without asking them about it. Some might even think that it would be a good thing that their personal limits should apply or be debated. They are so close minded that people with different standards to them are "assholes" and "stupidly offended". Those people are assholes. To prevent those people from causing chaos and trouble in the workplace, we have to put rules in place to force these people to adhere to a reasonnable amount of social limits that pleases most. [SEP] Oh. I had no idea that you didn't know that physical contact between people is something special and private
+> It's a tiny, tiny fraction of the population. So tiny that traces of cocaine now shows up in the water supply of the UK. To me its all walks of life i go to, friends i grew up with, friends i went to university with, friends from work ( i do work in television so that might have something to do with it), my parents friends do it, i used to work in a pub where i would regularly catch people doing it, it seems normal to see a queue of people waiting to do coke in most bars i go to. Source on the water supply claim; http [SEP] Its more than just 'my bubble'
+Except it's a specific thing done by men to women . Whether you like it or not, the issue IS gendered. [SEP] BECAUSE they are women
+Like I said, I'm not bashing it. I said that I don't relate to almost everything on here, which is why I called myself an "alien". [SEP] Whoa whoa whoa, let's not get upset about it.
+>The arguments assume that the subject is incapable of empathy, and is actively attempting to hold to these 'privileges' and keep them away from everyone else. That's simply not the case. Except that's not the argument at all. The argument is that , and that if you possess privilege you need to be conscious of it. >black men don't need to lock their doors when they roll through the ghetto, women aren't seen as creepy when they ask someone out - good, why is this a bad thing? In an ideal world, everyone would feel safe walking or driving in any part of town at any time, and no one would be treated as a creeper for expressing interest in another, and so forth. The first isn't true and the second isn't an example of privilege. It's not exclusive; if you wanted you could do the same thing. It doesn't really give women power in the sense that's meant when people talk about privilege. I have never known a woman who called a guy creepy just because he asked her out. I would argue that if you asked a woman out without at least some kind of engaging conversation under your belt then it would be pretty creepy. And anyway, doesn't a woman get to decide whether or not an advance is creepy? >This isn't an ideal world - that may suck when situations where we don't have such 'privilege' are encountered, but that's life. Being able to say privilege is 'just a fact of life' is an example of privilege. >Worse, these arguments require, by necessity, the outlook of a societal parasite. Rather than working to change things or make their own situation better, these people want to shame others for what they themselves don't have. What exactly is parasitic about, for example, wanting people not to think your natural hair is weird? Or, not having to justify having a "funny" name?. Or, being able to get hired despite having a "funny" name? Or, asking for proportional attention and context to be given when discussing issues that are used to dismiss all of the problems in your community? You seem to think of privilege as some kind of interpersonal welfare, when really it's about calling attention to the blind assumptions that reinforce harmful power structure. And contrary to your point, when people point it out they're assuming you're a good person who can change their behavior and think and act more fairly. The rhetoric gets inflamed sometimes, but frankly some people are tired of having a one in ten chance of being murdered. And anyway, rhetoric gets heated for any subject; why is it only an issue when the discussion is over privilege? [SEP] privilege is difficult to recognize because it's based on deeply ingrained assumptions about race, gender, etc.
+What parts of it do you believe tell Christians that they need to maintain the status quo? [SEP] Have you read the passage?
+Yes, Helen Keller did mention that her deafness had more of a negative impact on her life than her blindness. If I remember correctly she said that this was because deafness was the more isolating of the two: it kept her out of the company of other people and inhibited her from a totally free expression of her thoughts, and understanding of others'. What bothers me isn't that she's seen as a famous or inspirational figure, but that most people don't know of her beyond the fact that she was deafblind. Helen Keller was also a suffragette and a staunch pacifist. Her political leaning was radically socialist (especially for her times), she advocated for women's rights (particularly with regard to the availability of birth control), was a founding member of the ACLU, traveled widely, and was highly educated. She wrote about a dozen books and even more essays... and yet most people gloss over those contributions entirely. Yeah, she was close friends with AG Bell, and yeah, you can certainly pull quotations out of the context of her life and her experiences and view them as an indictment of the Deaf community. She wasn't shy about sharing her opinions, that much is certain. But from what I've seen? The people who really hold her up as a role model are hearing, able-bodied people who are too focused on the "supercrip" storyline and don't actually know that much about who she was or what she stood for. [SEP] (Though I'm not sure how she could fairly imagine what it might have been like to be only deaf or only blind, so it must have been difficult for her to accurately answer which one was "worse" for her.)
 Lol, go to Italy and ask recent graduates about residency. Recent grads in Italy, France, Spain, Greece( to name a few) are basically told to leave the country to get a job. The US is more diverse than Europe, its an immigrant nation constantly becoming more diverse. There is an entire generation of lost Europeans who will never be able to live the life their parents did. You need to travel more before you embarrass yourself anymore. Edit: for the down voters who can’t handle any criticism of the EU. Youth unemployment is at 18.1% in the euro area http It has been high for a decade. Lost generation is definitely a sensible term here. Edit 2: Why does this anger so many of you? How many of you know a person who had to leave you country to get a job? [SEP] You need to travel more before you embarrass yourself anymore.
-It doesn't directly. That's not the goal. The goal is just to promote the way Google thinks these things should work, and plant the seed in people's minds in terms of setting expectations. That's what they have been doing. It's part of the reason why we're talking about how Verizon and all the others are screwing their customers with exorbitantly expensive plans instead of beating our chests about how the US is the best at everything like we were doing 5 years ago. I don't think you're quite aware of the marketplace and how it's changed based on this exchange so far so what I'm saying might not be making sense to you. We are still in the era where companies like Verizon literally write their own regulations, but at least people now generally recognize it as being a bad state of affairs and not the way it's supposed to work. [SEP] I don't think you're quite aware of the marketplace and how it's changed based on this exchange so far so what I'm saying might not be making sense to you.
-Well no because eating tacos on "taco Tuesdays" is just a vanity for fun as you said. Reducing meat and dairy consumption is actually important, unlike whether you eat tacos on a Tuesday or not. [SEP] Reducing meat and dairy consumption is actually important, unlike whether you eat tacos on a Tuesday or not.
-Um, there were some rather famous court cases in the US & EU in the 90's. http The cases touched on predatory pricing, strong-arming OEMs, vender lock-in, monopolistic bundling of products to undercut competitors. Microsoft threatened OEM vendors who attempted to offer (cheap) Linux chrome books and aggressively locked out browser / word processing competitors... so now cheap options for the 3rd world / low income areas. Their extend & lock out strategy of web standards and formats was a huge issue. Microsoft had a 20-year stranglehold on the industry, and it's really only within the past decade has MS been a reasonable entity (and that's only due to Apple / Google / Amazon / Linux rising up). Millennialis with no memory of or interest in leaning this stuff is infuriating :) This is a widely acknowledged by anyone who wasn't in diapers in the early 00's. http [SEP] This is a widely acknowledged by anyone who wasn't in diapers in the early 00's.
-Thats utterly false. I'm sorry man. Any well trained police officer would have handled walking into this situation the same way. The filed report, based on the article you cited, states that these men reportedly pulled a fire alarm, were causing damage and were potentially armed with a small knife. The police were told to arrive "right away". Any "good cop" would have done exactly what these officers did: entered closed quarters with two potentially armed and dangerous men ready to protect themselves. Their fingers were not on their triggers and they were clearly telling the Lewis brothers to get on the ground and neither of them complied. I can't see the pepper spray in this video, so I can't comment on it. Absolutely zero police brutality in this video. [SEP] Thats utterly false. I'm sorry man.
-I saw this post on facebook yesterday and immediately scrolled past its shitty click-bait headline. But seeing this post on /r/TrueReddit? Are you fucking kidding me? Fuck that noise, this article is shit and the author makes an extremely poor argument. The author is lamenting the poor souls who are pigeon-holed into the often made up hop- tastic epicenter of craft/micro brews. Oh woe is them! Hops have such a pungent taste and odor, and these weary patrons are forced to imbibe only the IBU-est of concoctions. Give me a fucking break. I know this article was written in 2013, but seriously, what a joke. Oh, you're friend doesn't like hoppy beers? It must be impossible to find beer from the puny list of barleywines, blondes, browns, wheats, porters, stouts, wilds, creams, spiced, fruit, smoked, Belgian strongs, dubbels, trippels, quads, saisons, wits, lambics, goses, guezes, English sweet stouts, imp stouts, dunkels, Berliner Weiss, weizenbocks, kolschs, scotch wee heavys, pils, bocks, zwickels, scharz, viennan, Asian rice lagers, and steams. What's that? That list is longer that you thought? Well that's because you can't think because you're a fucking moron. There are now more than 3,000 breweries in the U.S.. You know how many existed just 30 years ago? Around a fucking hundred. 1 0 0. There is more choice and variation now than there ever was. Oh, but what about the 4,000 breweries that existed before in the 1800s? Yeah, did they have access to the giant multitude of hop varieties that we have now? What about the crazy yeast strains we're able to cultivate? Fuck you. Beer now is exponentially more varied than it ever was before. Can't find a beer you like? Either you're not looking hard enough, or you don't like beer (sucks to suck!). Oh, and calling a beer "hoppy" is also fucking stupid. Hops can be tropical, juicy, aromatic, flowery, lemony, minty, and a million other fucking things. None of those are "bitter" (which is what I think the author is getting at). Don't like hoppy beers? Well then I guess you also don't like your beer to gush with an overflowing juiciness that is only rivaled by Zebra Fruit Stripe gum. What's that, you do like that sensation? Well then, isn't your face fucking red. Don't like IPAs, Stouts, Sours, Lagers, Ales, etc.? THEN DON'T DRINK IT! It isn't some arduous task to find a quality, affordable beer in the U.S. anymore that fits your most likely limited scope of preferred taste. While introductory brewers might jump to adding more hops to a beer in the hopes of making it better, true craftsmen hone their skills toward yeast cultivation, wood and barrel aging and other things that require a lot more chemistry knowledge. The beer industry should not cater towards your palate at the expense of others. There is more than plenty to choose from, so don't knock the other guys because it doesn't jive with your own god damn preferences. TL;DR: Go fuck yourself, drink something else. [SEP] that fits your most likely limited scope of preferred taste
-I think what lazyslacker may have been implying is that you rely on the thesaurus too much. When you wonder "what's another word for ____" you're missing out on VALUABLE, subtle connotations which change the flavor of what you're saying. First, I want to thank you for sharing your experience on Reddit, not many will do that. I'm not trying to come at you from a harsh angle, but I think your writing needs a lot of work. In this piece you shared, your writing is really...verbose. Wordy, uselessly flowery for what you're trying to convey. You "lifted your weary skull from slumber?" All we need to know, in this story, for your purposes, is that you woke up in the middle of the night. You are not telling a Christmas Tale, you are not writing a classic. "...to face a most blinding and startling predicament" - people do not actually talk like this! You know this! "Muffled by the noxious billows about the atmosphere" - People don't get "noxious billows" - they get "smoke." If you want to spice up "smoke," then call it thick smoke, black smoke, suffocating black smoke. "Noxious billows" is the definition of verbose. You are saying words you have no reason to say. Again, you have no reason to say "atmosphere" over room. It goes on like this, over and over. You leave really clear tracks have you've just been abusing the fuck out of your thesaurus. I don't mean to tell you that simple writing is necessarily always better writing. But your style here is totally inappropriate and really...unrefined. Just because you use pretty words does not give your writing quality. "Infernal vicinity"? I'm not saying you without a doubt used a thesaurus here, but your writing at points sounds like it was created by Chinese-to-English Google Translate. Your writing sounds nothing like how English speakers actually communicate (in any context, low brow OR high brow). Holy fuck. Dude. I know I'm just some random guy on the internet, but if you truly want to progress as a writer, please take what I'm saying to heart. No one in their right fucking skull says "the seventeenth anniversary of my birth" over "my seventeenth birthday." Do you think you are Sir Toppingtonhatsfordshireworth? I'll back up. As a writer, you want to convey the immediacy, the pain, the harsh reality of this traumatic event to your reader. You want to make a clear path from you, to your reader, through your words. What you have done is thrown huge, unwieldy, awkward words and phrasing in that path. You are obscuring you meaning, you are obscuring your story. You need to go back to the beginning, tell us what happened. If you want to tell your story richly, use simple, rich words. I know this probably sounds very harsh. But...I just had this need to tell you there's something very wrong going on here. Again, thanks for your contribution to Reddit. edit: I want to reinforce how important this story is. Your last paragraph is great, you have something really important here. I just think the mechanics could be much improved... [SEP] I know this probably sounds very harsh. But...I just had this need to tell you there's something very wrong going on here.
-Extremes exist on both sides, what you call activism in I consider bullying, going after a mans livelihood for having different beliefs or opinions is repugnant. As always you resorted to name calling instead of discussion, you don't know me at all so keep your insults to yourself. I came here with no real expectation of actual discourse since your side is incapable of it without so called "intellectual" high brow condensation. It's ok keep on beating those drums. Worked great in 16. [SEP] As always you resorted to name calling instead of discussion
-Look, unless there is some underlying assumption that blm or black peoples in general are wrong, don't understand, etc because of their skin color, it isn't racist. And don't get me wrong, I think there may be an element of that in some people attitudes towards blm, but you can't just decide that the a comment is based on racism. I think Bernie would be the best candidate for black people because of his long and solid record on civil rights. Absolutely nothing racist about me saying that. If I was stubborn and didn't want to engage anybody (not my style, I am always open to other views) that wouldn't or wouldn't listen, once again, not racist (unless I refused to engage over something related to skin color). [SEP] Look, unless there is some underlying assumption that blm or black peoples in general are wrong, don't understand, etc because of their skin color, it isn't racist.
->This will not happen. / If anything, our economy (generally speaking) has been performing extremely well. I love when people show up and say "it will not happen" with certainty and then point to the fact that it hasn't happened yet as evidence. You realize we're only a few months into this shit, right? >His approval rating overall has little bearing on our economic state and future. What the fuck are you talking about? The lower Trump's approval rating, the more GOP will have to jump ship in order to save their own asses in reelection. >This election opened up the realization that we weren't taking political polling well or fairly (NYT projected a Clinton victory by over 80%). For fucks sake, this again? Do you not understand the difference between polling current opinion and trying to predict the future? Ask a bunch of people in a room if they approve or disapprove - there's your approval rating. Ask them who they think they'll vote for in a month - that's obviously subject to change. If you think inaccurate prediction models somehow cast doubt onto approval ratings, then you have a severe misunderstanding of the basic underlying concepts. [SEP] For fucks sake, this again? Do you not understand the difference between polling current opinion and trying to predict the future?
-Ahhh one of my favourite Moodyman tracks... Shades of Jae a close 2nd. The RBMA Moodyman interview is worth a watch if you can find it. Refreshing to see non-crap music here in r/electronicmusic :) [SEP] Refreshing to see non-crap music here in r/electronicmusic
-> I have seen nothing like that for Hillary. Yeah, you didn't see anything like that in most states Hillary wins. Because the people Hillary wins with are older people and Democrats, not younger people and independents that Sanders win. I also live in NJ and I know many people that are going to vote for Hillary in the primary. It just depends on who you know. [SEP] Because the people Hillary wins with are older people and Democrats, not younger people and independents that Sanders win.
-Your smug is showing. You can disprove their claims without lowering yourself to the level of condescension and name calling. It only detracts from the message. If you call her out, fine, but there is no need to talk down to her. Even if you can't reason with her to get her to understand the false nature of her claims, being an asshole won't persuade her or others towards your point of view. You just look like an asshole. [SEP] Your smug is showing.
-You lack perspective. One is a man asking questions regarding multiple incidents with copious amounts of evidence that he eventually admitted to. And those questions are about as sedate as could be ask, given the situation. The second is a man angry about what he believes is a bullshit charge attempting to smear his good name. And given the complete lack of evidence, lack of remotely clear memory of the one charging, some questionable as fuck statements from the same person, and obsoletely nobody corroborating her story. And in fact the only evidence, as odd as it is, are his calendars, SNL jokes aside. I would say he has a right to angry. But stay blind to the things that are presented to you, toe your chosen party line and continue to be part of the problem that dumbasses on both sides cause. I mean hell, your comparison of the two incidents is spot on for the magic land you want to inhabit. [SEP] You lack perspective
-not a homophobe at all, in fact, i commend chris' work on LGBT equality in the NFL and acceptance of gay rights. However, based on the things I've heard him say and do since his retirement and his treatment of certain other individuals, I have valid reasons to hold negative sentiments of Chris Kluwe. He is not a nice person. [SEP] He is not a nice person.
-So, nobody owned the land before, but that "nobody" will be compensated with a land swap? The Palestinian people are not "nobody", and just because there was not a Palestinian person standing in that exact spot when construction started does not make it legal. Even a 5 year-old would have less flaws in his logic than you, but at least he would have some basic human decency. [SEP] So, nobody owned the land before, but that "nobody" will be compensated with a land swap?
-For me that’s about suspension of disbelief. They showed that the hardcore response team were unaware of what they were up against, that tactically Dolores and co. were a step ahead of them. That the less-qualified response teams were wiped out isn’t hard to accept. Honestly, I detest the phrase ‘lazy writing’ - it’s a term you only read on forums. As a fully paid up film critic, it’s not something I’ve ever written, or indeed seen a colleague write. [SEP] Honestly, I detest the phrase ‘lazy writing’ - it’s a term you only read on forums.
-It's not the touching that is a problem. It's the clear spite and hate you can see from all the pics... What's Paul going to do? Become president... You'll just remain an idiot [SEP] What's Paul going to do? Become president...
-I can tell you don't have a clue about current immigration politics other than a few cliches you heard on the mainstream media. I can barely make heads or tails with your badly written comment. Here is a simple fact: before the 1960s immigration was limited to Western-white nations. The nations that limited immigration this way were all very liberal, with more freedom of speech, and without the hateful labels you use to target critics of immigration. [SEP] I can tell you don't have a clue about current immigration politics other than a few cliches you heard on the mainstream media.
-"Saints Row has been a poor man's GTA" I personally believe if you even say things like that you're not fan. Open World Modern Game involving gangs? GTA Rip-Off! Cheap Version! GTA Clone!. I guess Mafia is a Poor Man's GTA III and Scarface was a Poor Man's Vice City. This game has the skins aspect, whch could easily be refered to as the Overwatch part of his argument. [SEP] I personally believe if you even say things like that you're not fan.
-I'm well aware of what was in the clue, I simply cited Rameses as an example because that was the name that Peter used. I'm also aware that there are multiple propositions for who was the "pharaoh of the exodus". None of those change the fact that the exodus itself is pure mythology. I'll concede to being wrong about "no named pharaohs". However, I'll also point out that the books in which those pharaohs are mentioned are historical rather than mythological. [SEP] None of those change the fact that the exodus itself is pure mythology.
-Lol yes! Of course it is. It's Reddit after all. Plus it's a temptation that's there that could be better managed I guess. You could tell by the people asking for it so fervently that it was going to get used for wrong. It's a good feature, it's just too powerful and too easily manipulated. But again, as I said...single player game, do whatever you want I guess [SEP] It's Reddit after all.
->This is a reverse of the "gender gap doesn't exist, because it's explained by choices women make" . It's wrong there too. That may be a part, but seriousness of the attempt includes looking for information that will make the attempt successful. Choosing les effective methods reflects on lower will to succeed. No, it's not. Men don't choose more immediately lethal methods because "that's the manly way to do it", and same goes for women. Further, there is no evidence to support the idea that the choice of method is related to a rational decision based on "effectiveness" or "seriousness" of the attempt. The decision is the result of several other factors. http >This isn't a 20% increase. 7 men die to suicide for every 3 women. Men are disproportionally dying to suicide, and you're too caught up in the "but let me explain why women have it worse to even admit that it needs action. Men are be disproportionately dying to suicide as a result of disproportionately choosing more lethal means of committing the act. Just because this is a fact doesn't mean it is pertinent to discussios of inequality between the sexes, or I'm arguing it shouldn't be addressed. >This does not mean that the disadvantages that affect the less disadvantaged group should be ignored. Your point dismisses those disadvantages without consideration beyond "well, women have it worse". It's not a fucking competition! Groups being shit on is wrong! Whether that's women being more at risk of sexual assault, or men being vastly hit harder by the courts. >Be against it all. Because feminist leadership is EXTREMELY dismissive of the male perspective on issues that men feel marginalized or ignored about. Media is also. Society is. I'm not dismissing "disadvantages" faced by men, or arguing we should ignore a less disadvanteged group. And you're right it's not a competition. However, that doesn't mean the more disadvanteged group needs to share the spotlight, nor that both groups deserve equal attention, nor that every concern held by either group is valid. And to be frank, the "male rights" activists can be just as hostile and dismissive as feminists can allegedly be. Shouldn't they be faced with the same criticism? >But for fuck's sake, we will never come together while we quibble over who has it worse like it's some form of oppression olympics. There's part of the problem. Sometimes just acknowledging one group has in fact had worse upsets the other group. How can you expect either group to find together if they can't acknowledge one group may actually have it worse? [SEP] There's part of the problem. Sometimes just acknowledging one group has in fact had worse upsets the other group. How can you expect either group to find together if they can't acknowledge one group may actually have it worse?
-> and old school sexism There is nothing OK and "old school" about the sexism happening here. It happens in every facet of our lives. Work, school, etc. It is not exclusive to auto racing. This type of behavior will never die out because people are sick and for lack of a better term extremely socially awkward. As a male, and male racing fan I would never treat another motorsport fan this way and I have had very intellegent conversations with women about racing and it was never about "HAA DUUR YOU SO PRETTY".. It probably doesn't happen very much but everyone is acting like it happens all the time. [SEP] There is nothing OK and "old school" about the sexism happening here.
-Well they seemed to imply that -> moratorium on "Financial Abortion" -> Not caring about men's issues. I clarified, for the benefit of people who might be unfamiliar with financial abortion, that the concept itself is effectively a shutting down of the conversation, and thus we feel it's not an appropriate topic on a discussion board where child support reform ought to be discussed. Barring one specific topic so that dozens of others can be discussed. I know to some ppl the concept that some speech can actually inhibit other speech is absolutely mindbendingly difficult to grasp. Don't hurt yourself trying to. [SEP] I know to some ppl the concept that some speech can actually inhibit other speech is absolutely mindbendingly difficult to grasp. Don't hurt yourself trying to.
-Of course it doesn't claim there are none; where are you getting this? I'm not saying that no one would "waste" UBI money. I'm saying - and so are all the UBI proponents - that the amount of "waste" that occurs is acceptable in such a system, because it's far outweighed by the good it does and the value it puts back into the economy in the forms of both money spent that would not otherwise be spent, and people increasing their own value and earning power by getting out of debt or buying education or what have you. Also, there are thousands of people in my city, right now, who don't work because there are no jobs available to them. They - the people, that is - can't afford education to do the jobs, or transportation to get to where the jobs are; and even if they had those things, there still aren't enough jobs for everyone. That situation is only going to get worse. Is it your opinion that when there isn't enough work to go around, those who lose the job lottery should starve? [SEP] They - the people, that is - can't afford education to do the jobs, or transportation to get to where the jobs are; and even if they had those things, there still aren't enough jobs for everyone. That situation is only going to get worse. Is it your opinion that when there isn't enough work to go around, those who lose the job lottery should starve?
-No, many recent immigrants still retain the culture of their previous homeland. Assimilation usually takes a generation or two. This neighborhood is filled with recent immigrants and this type of behavior may in fact be less reprehensible in their former homes. Still appalling I am sure but not national news appalling. Many South and Central American countries have much higher levels of personal violence than the US. Sometimes that culture comes with immigrants. Where in the US if some teenager gets sick it's a gross shitty thing to happen, in some other country where these folks are from it may be a deep personal insult for someone to A) throw up the liquor they were given and, B) foul up a child's room or nursery. This may be such a great insult it requires immediate retribution. Get out of the internet for awhile, the whole world is filled with different people, beliefs, and morals and it does not all revolve around US politics and Sarah Palin. [SEP] Get out of the internet for awhile, the whole world is filled with different people, beliefs, and morals and it does not all revolve around US politics and Sarah Palin.
-Funny, because I feel kind of the same way (minus the abortion thing. It's not a woman's issue to me. It's a common sense issue) I am a Paris Hilton loving, reality tv watching, circumcised cock loving size 6. I feel like that kind of personality type is ripped on a lot. My main beef with this subreddit (despite the fact that I do love it) is that sometimes, so much focus is put on positive body image that people forget about positive bodily habits. For example, with the whole "heavy is the way to be" thing that seems constantly projected here, it seems like people forget that the only reason developed nations are becoming so fat is because we stopped eating well and moving around. Given how rare genetic diseases are that force you to become overweight, there are pretty high chances that overweight people are not taking care of themselves, and I don't think that it should be something we celebrate and idealize just because it's the opposite of what the media likes. I mean; if you love being fat, more power to you, but I think it's kind of silly to over justify being overweight like some many people on XX do like its what we all should be doing. I really hope that reddettiquite is taken into consideration and this isn't down voted into oblivion. Im sure it will rattle someone's chains. [SEP] but I think it's kind of silly to over justify being overweight like some many people on XX do like its what we all should be doing.
-I think the issue has a lot less to do with Megapurple itself and a lot more to do with how the industry treats its customers. But there is some clarification to be done here: Concentrate is not all sold under the "Megapurple" brand. Megapurple is a concentrate targeted to help increase color. But you can buy concentrate in almost any variety from many regions of California, and a lot of it has nothing to do with the color, it's about adding glucose in fructose and acid in a proportional way. I think the issue is this, and I've bloviated on this many, many times. The wine industry as a whole is markedly dishonest with its most loyal consumers. I think the reaction to things like Megapurple have more to do with consumers feeling like they're not getting the whole story from an industry where the story is very, very important. Morevoer, I think that there is a reasonable amount of negativity around a product like Megapurple because the product isn't spoken about honestly and in a straightforward way. I still think there are plenty of reasons to be negative about it, but I think having an open discussion about how it's used would help clear up a lot of myths. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, I can tell you for a fact that not EVERY wine under $20 uses concentrate. We make quite a few $20 and under wines, we've never released a single wine with concentrate. I can also tell you that I know of many other winemakers who make plenty of wines under $20 that don't use concentrate either. So while it is certainly a practice you might find, it's far less common amongst smaller producers (and I would venture to say it's not "common" at all, with the exception of rained out or otherwise weather-busted vintages (this being one of the reasons to chaptalize noted above)). EDIT: …and at some point you have to start asking yourself how you feel about any and all products and techniques that can be used to make wine. If you wanted to have an "ethical" stance on whether using those products and techniques was okay by you or not you'd have to start carrying around a spreadsheet with you. The bottom line is this: do you like the wine? Are you interested in how it's made? Are you more interested in ranking the "authenticity" of a wine than you are in the "enjoyability" of a wine? Are those different pursuits entirely? Are they discussions of quality or just difference? I'm not pretending to suggest I have the answer to those rhetorical questions, those are personal and everyone will answer them differently and nobody is wrong. But it's worth the thought experiment. [SEP] Morevoer, I think that there is a reasonable amount of negativity around a product like Megapurple because the product isn't spoken about honestly and in a straightforward way. I still think there are plenty of reasons to be negative about it, but I think having an open discussion about how it's used would help clear up a lot of myths.
-I agree that some people are going to kill, no matter what; that doesnt explain why more and more people want to see the United States harmed, and why more and more people cite our foreign policies/intervention as their ispiration for terrorist acts against us. You should really read up on why these people are doing what they're doing, you might actually see it from their perspective and understand that we are killing a lot of innocent people in other countries. [SEP] I agree that some people are going to kill, no matter what
->It seems to me your post is making the flawed assumption that the Zen texts accurately or literally describe the behavior of Zen Masters in real life. I don't think so. I think I am poking fun at the pre-conceptions people bring to Zen, so I might have actually been on especially good behavior here in NOT bringing my own pre-conceptions. For example, this is a preconception here, of yours: >Zen texts are meant to point to seeing true nature. They are not a source of information on what is or is not Zen, or how masters behaved. I guess there are some texts that I would call zen texts, but I think I said "texts that contain the sayings, stories, cases, and koans" of folks that are recognizable within the tradition folks like Watts saw as zen. (I still have to repeat that just because an academic says so an so "is Zen", to me there has to be a pattern of self mockery or humor, or poking fun at doctrine or poking fun at practice, or some reference to the ineffable, etc. that is characteristic of zen. If they are Sanskrit translators or preach a bunch of flowery doctrine with double adjectives, that's a dead giveaway. Zen was surely not imitating the Indians.) Why not talk about what shows up as Zen within any given text. With the scarcity of "zen texts" we might have to grab the zen where we find it to some degree, even if the text includes other stuff. Most of these texts were collaborations of more than one person over a period of decades or even centuries. Most of the sutras can be dismissed out of hand, so that mostly leaves a few books that were anthologies and some books that were "sayings of" kinds of books. Either way, are we not just talking about some sayings, some cases, some stories, some koans? Where is the zen doctrine? There isn't any. If you are looking at doctrine, you are looking at something else, as far as I can tell. Now, when you read a case, there might be a commentary as well. But most of the time, case, commentary, it leaves one either speechless in the case of someone who came to it empty, or in the case of the Buddhists, they are going to have to drown out both the case and the commentary with about half an hour of interpretation, smoothing it over until the balls are sucked right up into the torso. So it may not be a source of information, but then, where is that source of information? Its the world you live in. The cases are just about seeing. They are often examples of seeing that might be recognized. Or maybe if you don't cut it off, they can show you something, get your own eyes moving. Pointing is not pointing with significance like a Moses would point at the commandments. Pointing is sharing an invitation with no expectation or guarantee. >You really believe they're sociopathic lunatics? Put that way, no. But the question behind that is "do I believe that stuff really happened". I am sure some of it did, and some of it didn't. Which did and which didn't? Here, the question behind that: "Would it make any difference if it did or didn't happen?" No. NOOOOO?!!!!? (I hear swearing?) No. Obviously, it happens all the time that someone figures out that humans are suckers for words, names etc. and see for a bit, or for a lot. It doesn't depend on zen texts. So obviously some of that stuff like Joshu having a three legged chair actually happened, dude, in real life man!!!! And some of it was probably made up, or at least the names of the participants was changed, that is provable in textual examples. But if you read a case, and you get it, I wonder if you knew if it was made up or if it was real would make a difference in zen. I would in Buddhism I bet. One last thing, back to what the cases do: they can show a way of asking, and a way of answering. Without it becoming a generalization, or a summary, or a description. That's pretty cool. It's an example of how zen can work, and what is NOT zen is also shown. You learn to tell the difference between black and white without being instructed, just by going along for the ride. Life is like that. Zen is life. Now, in today's world, you don't hit people too much, not even dogs, like that is sooooo NOT pc. Are you going to let a little thing like that cloud your view of reality? Do you realize just how violent humans have been over time, do you have a friggin clue? Seriously, disemboweling, drawing and quartering, decapitations, hangings, lynchings. Even in China, a broken leg or a cut finger or a kick or hit with a stick was really NOTHING in comparison with a red hot iron rod up the ass to the throat. Which is what we here in the US were doing to people we didn't like just five generations ago. Get over the labels man, and read a little history to put these stories into perspective. Now the lunatics part, that's a little more fun. One definition of sanity is an integrated mind/word system that complies with social convention. Probably a good Buddhist would be the epitome of sanity. Such that if they declared someone to be crazy or high, whatever, that would carry some significant weight. But guess what happens when you jump ship on words? Social convention is no longer your reference point. What is? Seeing. Perfect seeing? No, seeing whatever the eyes present. Not supernatural. Prone to error. No guarantees. Wow. What a disappointment. No. Not. Exhilarating? No, probably not all the time. Alive? That. That right there. [SEP] Now, in today's world, you don't hit people too much, not even dogs, like that is sooooo NOT pc. Are you going to let a little thing like that cloud your view of reality? Do you realize just how violent humans have been over time, do you have a friggin clue? Seriously, disemboweling, drawing and quartering, decapitations, hangings, lynchings. Even in China, a broken leg or a cut finger or a kick or hit with a stick was really NOTHING in comparison with a red hot iron rod up the ass to the throat. Which is what we here in the US were doing to people we didn't like just five generations ago. Get over the labels man, and read a little history to put these stories into perspective.
-Why did any of this get down voted? Theres no secret to abs...it's about not having a bunch of fat on your gut. Your gut, on almost all people, is the last place to let go of its fat...so it takes determination and dedication, but it's not magic. [SEP] Why did any of this get down voted?
-That might be true. I'm just posting to inform others about an issue that will most likely occur to spark some intelligent conversation on the issue. Apparently most people don't want to converse about the long term survival of OWL as an esport. [SEP] That might be true. I'm just posting to inform others about an issue that will most likely occur to spark some intelligent conversation on the issue. Apparently most people don't want to converse about the long term survival of OWL as an esport.
-Whoa, someone is easily-provoked. First, I couldn't give a shit if playing video games was socially acceptable. Another thing that comes with age is a complete lack of caring about what other people think of your hobbies. You'll be able to play all the yu gi oh in public all you want in a few years! I sit on my couch at home and play a bit, maybe rarely have the gang over to play with some wobbly pops. What people down the street think of this is the last thing I could care about. Second, get real. If you're into gaming, you ought to know the basics. I wasn't alive in the 40s (believe it or not), but I know about Citizen Kane, Casablanca, etc. You should respect the medium and learn some basic history about it. I'm talking broad strokes. [SEP] I wasn't alive in the 40s (believe it or not), but I know about Citizen Kane, Casablanca, etc. You should respect the medium and learn some basic history about it. I'm talking broad strokes.
-That's not the best angle to see that challenge from is it? Zoomed out from behind. There's a better angle showing him winning the ball, http I think that was a penalty because despite getting the ball he knocked Firmino over. I really don't want to carry on doing this with you. You're really indignant about what was clearly a debatable call. You disagree with a professional referee's opinion. I don't know what else to say, you're right [SEP] I don't know what else to say, you're right
-I definitely don't care about a fish :-(. Sad huh. You're very intelligent, I'm impressed! The vegan world is lucky to have you. I wasn't necessarily trying to say I am right, but certainly that I would prefer a cat to be adopted rather than die. [SEP] I wasn't necessarily trying to say I am right, but certainly that I would prefer a cat to be adopted rather than die.
+It doesn't directly. That's not the goal. The goal is just to promote the way Google thinks these things should work, and plant the seed in people's minds in terms of setting expectations. That's what they have been doing. It's part of the reason why we're talking about how Verizon and all the others are screwing their customers with exorbitantly expensive plans instead of beating our chests about how the US is the best at everything like we were doing 5 years ago. We are still in the era where companies like Verizon literally write their own regulations, but at least people now generally recognize it as being a bad state of affairs and not the way it's supposed to work. [SEP] I don't think you're quite aware of the marketplace and how it's changed based on this exchange so far so what I'm saying might not be making sense to you.
+Well no because eating tacos on "taco Tuesdays" is just a vanity for fun as you said. [SEP] Reducing meat and dairy consumption is actually important, unlike whether you eat tacos on a Tuesday or not.
+Um, there were some rather famous court cases in the US & EU in the 90's. http The cases touched on predatory pricing, strong-arming OEMs, vender lock-in, monopolistic bundling of products to undercut competitors. Microsoft threatened OEM vendors who attempted to offer (cheap) Linux chrome books and aggressively locked out browser / word processing competitors... so now cheap options for the 3rd world / low income areas. Their extend & lock out strategy of web standards and formats was a huge issue. Microsoft had a 20-year stranglehold on the industry, and it's really only within the past decade has MS been a reasonable entity (and that's only due to Apple / Google / Amazon / Linux rising up). Millennialis with no memory of or interest in leaning this stuff is infuriating :) http [SEP] This is a widely acknowledged by anyone who wasn't in diapers in the early 00's.
+Any well trained police officer would have handled walking into this situation the same way. The filed report, based on the article you cited, states that these men reportedly pulled a fire alarm, were causing damage and were potentially armed with a small knife. The police were told to arrive "right away". Any "good cop" would have done exactly what these officers did: entered closed quarters with two potentially armed and dangerous men ready to protect themselves. Their fingers were not on their triggers and they were clearly telling the Lewis brothers to get on the ground and neither of them complied. I can't see the pepper spray in this video, so I can't comment on it. Absolutely zero police brutality in this video. [SEP] Thats utterly false. I'm sorry man.
+I saw this post on facebook yesterday and immediately scrolled past its shitty click-bait headline. But seeing this post on /r/TrueReddit? Are you fucking kidding me? Fuck that noise, this article is shit and the author makes an extremely poor argument. The author is lamenting the poor souls who are pigeon-holed into the often made up hop- tastic epicenter of craft/micro brews. Oh woe is them! Hops have such a pungent taste and odor, and these weary patrons are forced to imbibe only the IBU-est of concoctions. Give me a fucking break. I know this article was written in 2013, but seriously, what a joke. Oh, you're friend doesn't like hoppy beers? It must be impossible to find beer from the puny list of barleywines, blondes, browns, wheats, porters, stouts, wilds, creams, spiced, fruit, smoked, Belgian strongs, dubbels, trippels, quads, saisons, wits, lambics, goses, guezes, English sweet stouts, imp stouts, dunkels, Berliner Weiss, weizenbocks, kolschs, scotch wee heavys, pils, bocks, zwickels, scharz, viennan, Asian rice lagers, and steams. What's that? That list is longer that you thought? Well that's because you can't think because you're a fucking moron. There are now more than 3,000 breweries in the U.S.. You know how many existed just 30 years ago? Around a fucking hundred. 1 0 0. There is more choice and variation now than there ever was. Oh, but what about the 4,000 breweries that existed before in the 1800s? Yeah, did they have access to the giant multitude of hop varieties that we have now? What about the crazy yeast strains we're able to cultivate? Fuck you. Beer now is exponentially more varied than it ever was before. Can't find a beer you like? Either you're not looking hard enough, or you don't like beer (sucks to suck!). Oh, and calling a beer "hoppy" is also fucking stupid. Hops can be tropical, juicy, aromatic, flowery, lemony, minty, and a million other fucking things. None of those are "bitter" (which is what I think the author is getting at). Don't like hoppy beers? Well then I guess you also don't like your beer to gush with an overflowing juiciness that is only rivaled by Zebra Fruit Stripe gum. What's that, you do like that sensation? Well then, isn't your face fucking red. Don't like IPAs, Stouts, Sours, Lagers, Ales, etc.? THEN DON'T DRINK IT! It isn't some arduous task to find a quality, affordable beer in the U.S. anymore . While introductory brewers might jump to adding more hops to a beer in the hopes of making it better, true craftsmen hone their skills toward yeast cultivation, wood and barrel aging and other things that require a lot more chemistry knowledge. The beer industry should not cater towards your palate at the expense of others. There is more than plenty to choose from, so don't knock the other guys because it doesn't jive with your own god damn preferences. TL;DR: Go fuck yourself, drink something else. [SEP] that fits your most likely limited scope of preferred taste
+I think what lazyslacker may have been implying is that you rely on the thesaurus too much. When you wonder "what's another word for ____" you're missing out on VALUABLE, subtle connotations which change the flavor of what you're saying. First, I want to thank you for sharing your experience on Reddit, not many will do that. I'm not trying to come at you from a harsh angle, but I think your writing needs a lot of work. In this piece you shared, your writing is really...verbose. Wordy, uselessly flowery for what you're trying to convey. You "lifted your weary skull from slumber?" All we need to know, in this story, for your purposes, is that you woke up in the middle of the night. You are not telling a Christmas Tale, you are not writing a classic. "...to face a most blinding and startling predicament" - people do not actually talk like this! You know this! "Muffled by the noxious billows about the atmosphere" - People don't get "noxious billows" - they get "smoke." If you want to spice up "smoke," then call it thick smoke, black smoke, suffocating black smoke. "Noxious billows" is the definition of verbose. You are saying words you have no reason to say. Again, you have no reason to say "atmosphere" over room. It goes on like this, over and over. You leave really clear tracks have you've just been abusing the fuck out of your thesaurus. I don't mean to tell you that simple writing is necessarily always better writing. But your style here is totally inappropriate and really...unrefined. Just because you use pretty words does not give your writing quality. "Infernal vicinity"? I'm not saying you without a doubt used a thesaurus here, but your writing at points sounds like it was created by Chinese-to-English Google Translate. Your writing sounds nothing like how English speakers actually communicate (in any context, low brow OR high brow). Holy fuck. Dude. I know I'm just some random guy on the internet, but if you truly want to progress as a writer, please take what I'm saying to heart. No one in their right fucking skull says "the seventeenth anniversary of my birth" over "my seventeenth birthday." Do you think you are Sir Toppingtonhatsfordshireworth? I'll back up. As a writer, you want to convey the immediacy, the pain, the harsh reality of this traumatic event to your reader. You want to make a clear path from you, to your reader, through your words. What you have done is thrown huge, unwieldy, awkward words and phrasing in that path. You are obscuring you meaning, you are obscuring your story. You need to go back to the beginning, tell us what happened. If you want to tell your story richly, use simple, rich words. Again, thanks for your contribution to Reddit. edit: I want to reinforce how important this story is. Your last paragraph is great, you have something really important here. I just think the mechanics could be much improved... [SEP] I know this probably sounds very harsh. But...I just had this need to tell you there's something very wrong going on here.
+Extremes exist on both sides, what you call activism in I consider bullying, going after a mans livelihood for having different beliefs or opinions is repugnant. , you don't know me at all so keep your insults to yourself. I came here with no real expectation of actual discourse since your side is incapable of it without so called "intellectual" high brow condensation. It's ok keep on beating those drums. Worked great in 16. [SEP] As always you resorted to name calling instead of discussion
+And don't get me wrong, I think there may be an element of that in some people attitudes towards blm, but you can't just decide that the a comment is based on racism. I think Bernie would be the best candidate for black people because of his long and solid record on civil rights. Absolutely nothing racist about me saying that. If I was stubborn and didn't want to engage anybody (not my style, I am always open to other views) that wouldn't or wouldn't listen, once again, not racist (unless I refused to engage over something related to skin color). [SEP] Look, unless there is some underlying assumption that blm or black peoples in general are wrong, don't understand, etc because of their skin color, it isn't racist.
+>This will not happen. / If anything, our economy (generally speaking) has been performing extremely well. I love when people show up and say "it will not happen" with certainty and then point to the fact that it hasn't happened yet as evidence. You realize we're only a few months into this shit, right? >His approval rating overall has little bearing on our economic state and future. What the fuck are you talking about? The lower Trump's approval rating, the more GOP will have to jump ship in order to save their own asses in reelection. >This election opened up the realization that we weren't taking political polling well or fairly (NYT projected a Clinton victory by over 80%). Ask a bunch of people in a room if they approve or disapprove - there's your approval rating. Ask them who they think they'll vote for in a month - that's obviously subject to change. If you think inaccurate prediction models somehow cast doubt onto approval ratings, then you have a severe misunderstanding of the basic underlying concepts. [SEP] For fucks sake, this again? Do you not understand the difference between polling current opinion and trying to predict the future?
+Ahhh one of my favourite Moodyman tracks... Shades of Jae a close 2nd. The RBMA Moodyman interview is worth a watch if you can find it. :) [SEP] Refreshing to see non-crap music here in r/electronicmusic
+> I have seen nothing like that for Hillary. Yeah, you didn't see anything like that in most states Hillary wins. I also live in NJ and I know many people that are going to vote for Hillary in the primary. It just depends on who you know. [SEP] Because the people Hillary wins with are older people and Democrats, not younger people and independents that Sanders win.
+You can disprove their claims without lowering yourself to the level of condescension and name calling. It only detracts from the message. If you call her out, fine, but there is no need to talk down to her. Even if you can't reason with her to get her to understand the false nature of her claims, being an asshole won't persuade her or others towards your point of view. You just look like an asshole. [SEP] Your smug is showing.
+. One is a man asking questions regarding multiple incidents with copious amounts of evidence that he eventually admitted to. And those questions are about as sedate as could be ask, given the situation. The second is a man angry about what he believes is a bullshit charge attempting to smear his good name. And given the complete lack of evidence, lack of remotely clear memory of the one charging, some questionable as fuck statements from the same person, and obsoletely nobody corroborating her story. And in fact the only evidence, as odd as it is, are his calendars, SNL jokes aside. I would say he has a right to angry. But stay blind to the things that are presented to you, toe your chosen party line and continue to be part of the problem that dumbasses on both sides cause. I mean hell, your comparison of the two incidents is spot on for the magic land you want to inhabit. [SEP] You lack perspective
+not a homophobe at all, in fact, i commend chris' work on LGBT equality in the NFL and acceptance of gay rights. However, based on the things I've heard him say and do since his retirement and his treatment of certain other individuals, I have valid reasons to hold negative sentiments of Chris Kluwe. [SEP] He is not a nice person.
+The Palestinian people are not "nobody", and just because there was not a Palestinian person standing in that exact spot when construction started does not make it legal. Even a 5 year-old would have less flaws in his logic than you, but at least he would have some basic human decency. [SEP] So, nobody owned the land before, but that "nobody" will be compensated with a land swap?
+For me that’s about suspension of disbelief. They showed that the hardcore response team were unaware of what they were up against, that tactically Dolores and co. were a step ahead of them. That the less-qualified response teams were wiped out isn’t hard to accept. As a fully paid up film critic, it’s not something I’ve ever written, or indeed seen a colleague write. [SEP] Honestly, I detest the phrase ‘lazy writing’ - it’s a term you only read on forums.
+It's not the touching that is a problem. It's the clear spite and hate you can see from all the pics... You'll just remain an idiot [SEP] What's Paul going to do? Become president...
+I can barely make heads or tails with your badly written comment. Here is a simple fact: before the 1960s immigration was limited to Western-white nations. The nations that limited immigration this way were all very liberal, with more freedom of speech, and without the hateful labels you use to target critics of immigration. [SEP] I can tell you don't have a clue about current immigration politics other than a few cliches you heard on the mainstream media.
+"Saints Row has been a poor man's GTA" Open World Modern Game involving gangs? GTA Rip-Off! Cheap Version! GTA Clone!. I guess Mafia is a Poor Man's GTA III and Scarface was a Poor Man's Vice City. This game has the skins aspect, whch could easily be refered to as the Overwatch part of his argument. [SEP] I personally believe if you even say things like that you're not fan.
+I'm well aware of what was in the clue, I simply cited Rameses as an example because that was the name that Peter used. I'm also aware that there are multiple propositions for who was the "pharaoh of the exodus". I'll concede to being wrong about "no named pharaohs". However, I'll also point out that the books in which those pharaohs are mentioned are historical rather than mythological. [SEP] None of those change the fact that the exodus itself is pure mythology.
+Lol yes! Of course it is. Plus it's a temptation that's there that could be better managed I guess. You could tell by the people asking for it so fervently that it was going to get used for wrong. It's a good feature, it's just too powerful and too easily manipulated. But again, as I said...single player game, do whatever you want I guess [SEP] It's Reddit after all.
+>This is a reverse of the "gender gap doesn't exist, because it's explained by choices women make" . It's wrong there too. That may be a part, but seriousness of the attempt includes looking for information that will make the attempt successful. Choosing les effective methods reflects on lower will to succeed. No, it's not. Men don't choose more immediately lethal methods because "that's the manly way to do it", and same goes for women. Further, there is no evidence to support the idea that the choice of method is related to a rational decision based on "effectiveness" or "seriousness" of the attempt. The decision is the result of several other factors. http >This isn't a 20% increase. 7 men die to suicide for every 3 women. Men are disproportionally dying to suicide, and you're too caught up in the "but let me explain why women have it worse to even admit that it needs action. Men are be disproportionately dying to suicide as a result of disproportionately choosing more lethal means of committing the act. Just because this is a fact doesn't mean it is pertinent to discussios of inequality between the sexes, or I'm arguing it shouldn't be addressed. >This does not mean that the disadvantages that affect the less disadvantaged group should be ignored. Your point dismisses those disadvantages without consideration beyond "well, women have it worse". It's not a fucking competition! Groups being shit on is wrong! Whether that's women being more at risk of sexual assault, or men being vastly hit harder by the courts. >Be against it all. Because feminist leadership is EXTREMELY dismissive of the male perspective on issues that men feel marginalized or ignored about. Media is also. Society is. I'm not dismissing "disadvantages" faced by men, or arguing we should ignore a less disadvanteged group. And you're right it's not a competition. However, that doesn't mean the more disadvanteged group needs to share the spotlight, nor that both groups deserve equal attention, nor that every concern held by either group is valid. And to be frank, the "male rights" activists can be just as hostile and dismissive as feminists can allegedly be. Shouldn't they be faced with the same criticism? >But for fuck's sake, we will never come together while we quibble over who has it worse like it's some form of oppression olympics. [SEP] There's part of the problem. Sometimes just acknowledging one group has in fact had worse upsets the other group. How can you expect either group to find together if they can't acknowledge one group may actually have it worse?
+> and old school sexism It happens in every facet of our lives. Work, school, etc. It is not exclusive to auto racing. This type of behavior will never die out because people are sick and for lack of a better term extremely socially awkward. As a male, and male racing fan I would never treat another motorsport fan this way and I have had very intellegent conversations with women about racing and it was never about "HAA DUUR YOU SO PRETTY".. It probably doesn't happen very much but everyone is acting like it happens all the time. [SEP] There is nothing OK and "old school" about the sexism happening here.
+Well they seemed to imply that -> moratorium on "Financial Abortion" -> Not caring about men's issues. I clarified, for the benefit of people who might be unfamiliar with financial abortion, that the concept itself is effectively a shutting down of the conversation, and thus we feel it's not an appropriate topic on a discussion board where child support reform ought to be discussed. Barring one specific topic so that dozens of others can be discussed. [SEP] I know to some ppl the concept that some speech can actually inhibit other speech is absolutely mindbendingly difficult to grasp. Don't hurt yourself trying to.
+Of course it doesn't claim there are none; where are you getting this? I'm not saying that no one would "waste" UBI money. I'm saying - and so are all the UBI proponents - that the amount of "waste" that occurs is acceptable in such a system, because it's far outweighed by the good it does and the value it puts back into the economy in the forms of both money spent that would not otherwise be spent, and people increasing their own value and earning power by getting out of debt or buying education or what have you. Also, there are thousands of people in my city, right now, who don't work because there are no jobs available to them. [SEP] They - the people, that is - can't afford education to do the jobs, or transportation to get to where the jobs are; and even if they had those things, there still aren't enough jobs for everyone. That situation is only going to get worse. Is it your opinion that when there isn't enough work to go around, those who lose the job lottery should starve?
+No, many recent immigrants still retain the culture of their previous homeland. Assimilation usually takes a generation or two. This neighborhood is filled with recent immigrants and this type of behavior may in fact be less reprehensible in their former homes. Still appalling I am sure but not national news appalling. Many South and Central American countries have much higher levels of personal violence than the US. Sometimes that culture comes with immigrants. Where in the US if some teenager gets sick it's a gross shitty thing to happen, in some other country where these folks are from it may be a deep personal insult for someone to A) throw up the liquor they were given and, B) foul up a child's room or nursery. This may be such a great insult it requires immediate retribution. [SEP] Get out of the internet for awhile, the whole world is filled with different people, beliefs, and morals and it does not all revolve around US politics and Sarah Palin.
+Funny, because I feel kind of the same way (minus the abortion thing. It's not a woman's issue to me. It's a common sense issue) I am a Paris Hilton loving, reality tv watching, circumcised cock loving size 6. I feel like that kind of personality type is ripped on a lot. My main beef with this subreddit (despite the fact that I do love it) is that sometimes, so much focus is put on positive body image that people forget about positive bodily habits. For example, with the whole "heavy is the way to be" thing that seems constantly projected here, it seems like people forget that the only reason developed nations are becoming so fat is because we stopped eating well and moving around. Given how rare genetic diseases are that force you to become overweight, there are pretty high chances that overweight people are not taking care of themselves, and I don't think that it should be something we celebrate and idealize just because it's the opposite of what the media likes. I mean; if you love being fat, more power to you, I really hope that reddettiquite is taken into consideration and this isn't down voted into oblivion. Im sure it will rattle someone's chains. [SEP] but I think it's kind of silly to over justify being overweight like some many people on XX do like its what we all should be doing.
+I think the issue has a lot less to do with Megapurple itself and a lot more to do with how the industry treats its customers. But there is some clarification to be done here: Concentrate is not all sold under the "Megapurple" brand. Megapurple is a concentrate targeted to help increase color. But you can buy concentrate in almost any variety from many regions of California, and a lot of it has nothing to do with the color, it's about adding glucose in fructose and acid in a proportional way. I think the issue is this, and I've bloviated on this many, many times. The wine industry as a whole is markedly dishonest with its most loyal consumers. I think the reaction to things like Megapurple have more to do with consumers feeling like they're not getting the whole story from an industry where the story is very, very important. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, I can tell you for a fact that not EVERY wine under $20 uses concentrate. We make quite a few $20 and under wines, we've never released a single wine with concentrate. I can also tell you that I know of many other winemakers who make plenty of wines under $20 that don't use concentrate either. So while it is certainly a practice you might find, it's far less common amongst smaller producers (and I would venture to say it's not "common" at all, with the exception of rained out or otherwise weather-busted vintages (this being one of the reasons to chaptalize noted above)). EDIT: …and at some point you have to start asking yourself how you feel about any and all products and techniques that can be used to make wine. If you wanted to have an "ethical" stance on whether using those products and techniques was okay by you or not you'd have to start carrying around a spreadsheet with you. The bottom line is this: do you like the wine? Are you interested in how it's made? Are you more interested in ranking the "authenticity" of a wine than you are in the "enjoyability" of a wine? Are those different pursuits entirely? Are they discussions of quality or just difference? I'm not pretending to suggest I have the answer to those rhetorical questions, those are personal and everyone will answer them differently and nobody is wrong. But it's worth the thought experiment. [SEP] Morevoer, I think that there is a reasonable amount of negativity around a product like Megapurple because the product isn't spoken about honestly and in a straightforward way. I still think there are plenty of reasons to be negative about it, but I think having an open discussion about how it's used would help clear up a lot of myths.
+; that doesnt explain why more and more people want to see the United States harmed, and why more and more people cite our foreign policies/intervention as their ispiration for terrorist acts against us. You should really read up on why these people are doing what they're doing, you might actually see it from their perspective and understand that we are killing a lot of innocent people in other countries. [SEP] I agree that some people are going to kill, no matter what
+>It seems to me your post is making the flawed assumption that the Zen texts accurately or literally describe the behavior of Zen Masters in real life. I don't think so. I think I am poking fun at the pre-conceptions people bring to Zen, so I might have actually been on especially good behavior here in NOT bringing my own pre-conceptions. For example, this is a preconception here, of yours: >Zen texts are meant to point to seeing true nature. They are not a source of information on what is or is not Zen, or how masters behaved. I guess there are some texts that I would call zen texts, but I think I said "texts that contain the sayings, stories, cases, and koans" of folks that are recognizable within the tradition folks like Watts saw as zen. (I still have to repeat that just because an academic says so an so "is Zen", to me there has to be a pattern of self mockery or humor, or poking fun at doctrine or poking fun at practice, or some reference to the ineffable, etc. that is characteristic of zen. If they are Sanskrit translators or preach a bunch of flowery doctrine with double adjectives, that's a dead giveaway. Zen was surely not imitating the Indians.) Why not talk about what shows up as Zen within any given text. With the scarcity of "zen texts" we might have to grab the zen where we find it to some degree, even if the text includes other stuff. Most of these texts were collaborations of more than one person over a period of decades or even centuries. Most of the sutras can be dismissed out of hand, so that mostly leaves a few books that were anthologies and some books that were "sayings of" kinds of books. Either way, are we not just talking about some sayings, some cases, some stories, some koans? Where is the zen doctrine? There isn't any. If you are looking at doctrine, you are looking at something else, as far as I can tell. Now, when you read a case, there might be a commentary as well. But most of the time, case, commentary, it leaves one either speechless in the case of someone who came to it empty, or in the case of the Buddhists, they are going to have to drown out both the case and the commentary with about half an hour of interpretation, smoothing it over until the balls are sucked right up into the torso. So it may not be a source of information, but then, where is that source of information? Its the world you live in. The cases are just about seeing. They are often examples of seeing that might be recognized. Or maybe if you don't cut it off, they can show you something, get your own eyes moving. Pointing is not pointing with significance like a Moses would point at the commandments. Pointing is sharing an invitation with no expectation or guarantee. >You really believe they're sociopathic lunatics? Put that way, no. But the question behind that is "do I believe that stuff really happened". I am sure some of it did, and some of it didn't. Which did and which didn't? Here, the question behind that: "Would it make any difference if it did or didn't happen?" No. NOOOOO?!!!!? (I hear swearing?) No. Obviously, it happens all the time that someone figures out that humans are suckers for words, names etc. and see for a bit, or for a lot. It doesn't depend on zen texts. So obviously some of that stuff like Joshu having a three legged chair actually happened, dude, in real life man!!!! And some of it was probably made up, or at least the names of the participants was changed, that is provable in textual examples. But if you read a case, and you get it, I wonder if you knew if it was made up or if it was real would make a difference in zen. I would in Buddhism I bet. One last thing, back to what the cases do: they can show a way of asking, and a way of answering. Without it becoming a generalization, or a summary, or a description. That's pretty cool. It's an example of how zen can work, and what is NOT zen is also shown. You learn to tell the difference between black and white without being instructed, just by going along for the ride. Life is like that. Zen is life. Now the lunatics part, that's a little more fun. One definition of sanity is an integrated mind/word system that complies with social convention. Probably a good Buddhist would be the epitome of sanity. Such that if they declared someone to be crazy or high, whatever, that would carry some significant weight. But guess what happens when you jump ship on words? Social convention is no longer your reference point. What is? Seeing. Perfect seeing? No, seeing whatever the eyes present. Not supernatural. Prone to error. No guarantees. Wow. What a disappointment. No. Not. Exhilarating? No, probably not all the time. Alive? That. That right there. [SEP] Now, in today's world, you don't hit people too much, not even dogs, like that is sooooo NOT pc. Are you going to let a little thing like that cloud your view of reality? Do you realize just how violent humans have been over time, do you have a friggin clue? Seriously, disemboweling, drawing and quartering, decapitations, hangings, lynchings. Even in China, a broken leg or a cut finger or a kick or hit with a stick was really NOTHING in comparison with a red hot iron rod up the ass to the throat. Which is what we here in the US were doing to people we didn't like just five generations ago. Get over the labels man, and read a little history to put these stories into perspective.
+Theres no secret to abs...it's about not having a bunch of fat on your gut. Your gut, on almost all people, is the last place to let go of its fat...so it takes determination and dedication, but it's not magic. [SEP] Why did any of this get down voted?
+ [SEP] That might be true. I'm just posting to inform others about an issue that will most likely occur to spark some intelligent conversation on the issue. Apparently most people don't want to converse about the long term survival of OWL as an esport.
+Whoa, someone is easily-provoked. First, I couldn't give a shit if playing video games was socially acceptable. Another thing that comes with age is a complete lack of caring about what other people think of your hobbies. You'll be able to play all the yu gi oh in public all you want in a few years! I sit on my couch at home and play a bit, maybe rarely have the gang over to play with some wobbly pops. What people down the street think of this is the last thing I could care about. Second, get real. If you're into gaming, you ought to know the basics. [SEP] I wasn't alive in the 40s (believe it or not), but I know about Citizen Kane, Casablanca, etc. You should respect the medium and learn some basic history about it. I'm talking broad strokes.
+That's not the best angle to see that challenge from is it? Zoomed out from behind. There's a better angle showing him winning the ball, http I think that was a penalty because despite getting the ball he knocked Firmino over. I really don't want to carry on doing this with you. You're really indignant about what was clearly a debatable call. You disagree with a professional referee's opinion. [SEP] I don't know what else to say, you're right
+I definitely don't care about a fish :-(. Sad huh. You're very intelligent, I'm impressed! The vegan world is lucky to have you. [SEP] I wasn't necessarily trying to say I am right, but certainly that I would prefer a cat to be adopted rather than die.
 > So leave That's such an American attitude and silly argument. It's practically a cliche. "You have criticisms of our country....get the fuck out!" Like there is no more to consider when leaving your home and family. Not too hard to find other places Or how about one that is at least a full democracy. [SEP] That’s such an American attitude
-How does this make it to the front page? Is ESPN.com down? Not that I watch or care about sports, but is this game somehow a big deal? [SEP] Not that I watch or care about sports
-Interestingly you just described 2/3's of the gun stores I have ever been too. We as customers need to do a better job of walking away when this is the way a shop likes to treat its customers. I know it took me a good long while before I found a shop I am comfortable with...and now I have a strong relationship with the owner/staff and would not dream to go anywhere else. [SEP] I know it took me a good long while before I found a shop I am comfortable with...and now I have a strong relationship with the owner/staff and would not dream to go anywhere else.
-Jim doesn't watch other comics and still (poorly) attempts to do specials. Jim is not insightful or educated and still (poorly) pontificates about shit he has no clue about. Jim drank half a can of Miller light, made a prank call and went to rehab, now he's a spokesman for AA. Jim is an idiot. A quickwitted funny motherfucker, but an idiot nontheless. So I'm not really looking for logic in his actions. [SEP] Jim drank half a can of Miller light, made a prank call and went to rehab, now he's a spokesman for AA.
-I love reading above all, and that's why I can't stand Trails. The dialogue is shallow, repetitive, robotic, and completely devoid of personality. I never once felt like the world or characters came alive because there's no depth to anything. There is no complexity. I mostly play games for the story, and I am an avid reader of books, so this smug condescension that anyone who doesn't like it doesn't like story is misguided. I dislike it because I love reading. [SEP] I never once felt like the world or characters came alive because there's no depth to anything. There is no complexity.
-When it says 'Switch to tab', hold Shift as you press Enter to make it Duplicate the tab. If it's driving you insane then you should totally use the extension, but if it's not something you run up against often, it's handy to know that you can do it without. Unless I've totally misunderstood, which is always probable. [SEP] When it says 'Switch to tab', hold Shift as you press Enter to make it Duplicate the tab.
-Well consider this, if someone who is a chronic alcoholic is given a kidney transplant, and subsequently does not enter into rehabilitation, that alcoholic will then require another kidney later on , thus depriving two other people from receiving the transplant than if the original was given to someone who would assuredly take care of their health. [SEP] if the original was given to someone who would assuredly take care of their health.
-> Then he leaves Scully with superficialities...so patronizing. Like, a similarly aged Mulder only gets a sheepish glance at himself in the mirror but Scully's age leads her to a midlife crisis about her looks and some yearning for a baby and fears about Mulder finding someone else? Meanwhile, Mulder gets to play it cool? Honest, sincere question: Wasn't Mulder's own, personal "mid-life crisis" already explored quite thoroughly (in more than one instance), though? ...And, in those situations, didn't Scully get the opportunity to "play it cool", as well? More specifically, throughout the Season 10 episode "Mulder and Scully Meet the Were-Monster", Mulder is shown to be quite depressed, frustrated and saddened about his current position/role in life, and how his life has turned out, in general. (He was also shown to have been experiencing similar depression and frustration in "My Struggle", as well as in other episodes.) Scully responded to Mulder's personal crises in a rather cool, glib and lighthearted fashion, in those scenes, with lines such as, "Mulder, have you been taking your meds?", too. So...well, would it have really improved this episode to have Mulder once again reflect upon his mid-life issues? Or, instead, did the reversal in positions add to the overall feeling of "balance" and growth between the characters? Personally, I thought that the latter was true -- and that things might have become too repetitive, if Mulder were to have rehashed all of the issues that he had previously mentioned. Also, as a woman, I actually found the writing of Scully's character to be quite realistic, in this episode. Nearly every single human being on this planet experiences doubts, regrets and insecurities, at some point in their lives (especially as they grow older); that's a perfectly normal experience, and not something that should be looked upon in a negative or judgmental light. So, why can't Scully be shown to experience doubts, regrets and insecurities, as well? In addition, the character of Judy really got into Scully's head, so to speak, and deliberately played upon her personal insecurities for malicious reasons. Wouldn't it have been more "bland" if Scully didn't react to this trickery, at all, and wasn't susceptible to the same self-doubts that the majority of people, in real life, are? Your opinion is totally valid, of course, and I honestly don't mean to sound dismissive or disrespectful; I just find the comments about Scully and Mulder's crises to be very interesting, really. Some fans have mocked Mulder for his mid-life crisis, and others seem to be implying that Scully shouldn't be experiencing such a crisis, at all. Perhaps it's more of a reflection of people (in general)'s subconscious unwillingness to face the fact that, no matter how perfect and well-adjusted they are, they will likely have to struggle with severe self-doubt, insecurities and regret, at some stage in their lives? That one day they, too, will have to look back upon their lives in a way that they were never forced to, before -- and that they might not be thrilled with what they see? I don't know if that's the case, but it's been intriguing to read everyone's reactions to how Mulder and Scully, as characters, are personally coping with the aging process... [SEP] severe self-doubt, insecurities and regret, at some stage in their lives?
-> Existence of the self is a philosophical question, Thats silly, I can touch and feel myself, therefore my experience tells me that I exist. If you want to argue that we don't know that we exist, then I'll argue that you don't know that we are anything but a thought in someone else's mind and therefore evolution doesn't exist for us. Nothing about existence can be proven if you can't prove that you yourself exist. Thats a twisted web you've woven here. > Theories are not made up of proofs. All theories have a basis in a logical proof. namely that a hypothesis (true) if A + B. For example, the theory of gravity is true if I drop an apple and it falls to the ground. > Let's start with "something initiates everything". If I throw a ball, it travels through the air. That is my experience. I don't have to cover for every instance you can conceive of, because if you did, then you can't prove that evolution works prior to the big bang either. Neither of our theories hold true. Debate on both theories is therefore still open. > I also take issue with "the initiating catalyst is termed god". In my experience (i.e. empiric data point), when people talk about the initiating catalyst to existence, it's framed as god. If you want to call such a catalyst something else, thats fine, but evolution in that case doesn't have to be called "evolution" either. You call the initiating catalyst asdasfqewf and I'll call evolution saqsdqfd. [SEP] All theories have a basis in a logical proof. namely that a hypothesis (true) if A + B. For example, the theory of gravity is true if I drop an apple and it falls to the ground.
-I’ll be honest with you here - your posts are absolutely captivating me. The content isn’t really interesting since you’re saying the same thing repeatedly, but the dichotomy between your mastery of English writing and wildly inappropriate use of adjectives is impressive. Someone makes an opposing point and they’re “hysterically arguing,” you find an issue with something they say and you find it “disgusting.” Solid writing skills, but no one would ever accuse you of giving a measured response. As far as the issue at hand here, I strongly dislike chest gambling so I avoid it. I think $3-$5 for a digital skin (4-600 gems, depending on the quantity you bought) provides HiRez with a more than reasonable profit over 10,000 or so buyers (probably on the low end). I do find it pretty (watch my use of appropriate adjectives here) interesting when players of all sorts of games argue that chests, a clearly anti-consumer system, are a reasonable approach to content delivery. And yes, it is possible for companies to sustain themselves without resorting to unfair practices - more than one way to skin a cat, if you will. [SEP] Someone makes an opposing point and they’re “hysterically arguing,” you find an issue with something they say and you find it “disgusting.”
-You're way behind the times. http You should really try to do something about your anger. A good start would be to stop reading the Orange Papers. The more you feed it, the more it grows. I hope you find some kind of serenity soon. Here's another good read for you. http #comment-160 [SEP] You should really try to do something about your anger. A good start would be to stop reading the Orange Papers. The more you feed it, the more it grows. I hope you find some kind of serenity soon.
-Jesus christ, I know you have the best of intentions and all, but the volume of naivety in this subreddit can be flooring sometimes. Let me get this clear -- your grievances with the U.S. are (among other things) "healthcare, finances, the politics are a mess" so you want to move to Argentina and raise cattle and grow weed?! Have you opened a newspaper lately? Do you realize that Argentina is a country with a history of crony politics, fiscal irresponsibility, economic volatility and police corruption? How would you even begin to care for yourself, much less a herd of cows?! You also don't speak the language and would be entirely dependent on your significant other. You're not still in high school, so please don't tell me you don't believe there's a chance that something might happen during such a life changing transition that ends your relationship. What are you going to do then? My favorite part is that you don't want to live in the city, where you could find an expatriate community to lean on for support. No, you want to live in the country, where fewer people speak English and your potential support network is even harder to reach. But of course, you have experience living abroad. For one year. In the UK, studying archaeology. And you're getting unsubstantiated advice from strangers over reddit. Nevermind what I said before, you got this. [SEP] You're not still in high school, so please don't tell me you don't believe there's a chance that something might happen during such a life changing transition that ends your relationship. What are you going to do then?
-> Do not accept casual accusations of abuse, OP. seriously. This is a tactic to keep you from mentioning any problems you're having. [SEP] This is a tactic to keep you from mentioning any problems you're having.
-That's just the recycling of certain parts of beings, it doesn't somehow flatten the food chain as if it never existed. [SEP] That's just the recycling of certain parts of beings, it doesn't somehow flatten the food chain as if it never existed.
-Ah yes, the word "voluntary". Suppose I tell my boss to keep this job and shove it. I quit and go on my merry way. Meanwhile, my former boss is still barking orders to the poor saps who continue their employment (it commonly takes money to eat). See, me quitting didn't de-archify the boss. I'm curious, are you really having trouble understanding these things, or do you think that because it's a justification for theft, that you can't accept any of it? You can recognize the archiness of capitalists without thinking it's okay to seize the means of production. You can accept that wage-slavery is real without also wanting to do something about it. I know plenty of wage-slaves who feel this way. They're aware of what's going on, but aren't stirred to action. Have you ever had a shitty job? A shitty boss? It's okay to admit it. [SEP] I'm curious, are you really having trouble understanding these things, or do you think that because it's a justification for theft, that you can't accept any of it?
-offensive? you mean naïve. OP's naïveté is hilarious, poor kid disregards religious gals because of his misguided ideas that religious gals don't put out. clearly he needs an intervention to get some. who better to address this than those who know raja beta the best, his mummy-pappa. [SEP] who better to address this than those who know raja beta the best, his mummy-pappa.
-Organizations like the CIA don't give money away without asking for something in return. If the Dalai Lama is on the CIA/NED payroll that would mean he is working for the CIA/NED. If he wasn't concerned about numbers in his bank account why would he accept $180,000 in his personal bank account every year from them? That's a lot of numbers! If Gandhi had been taking money from the CIA I don't think he would be so highly regarded by supporters of nonviolence. [SEP] If he wasn't concerned about numbers in his bank account why would he accept $180,000 in his personal bank account every year from them? That's a lot of numbers!
-I understand your want for it to be that simple, but experience has taught me that "truth" in science is sorely tainted by funding. Did you read the NY Times article I provided? I thought it was put together well and addressed many issues in depth that were not addressed in the official Monsanto document. In the NY Times article "Monsanto scientists and others cite research that has found that mineral deficiencies caused by glysophate can be mitigated with soil additives." I don't know how many soil science majors you've known but it is a pretty common field of study where I am from and most I have known will explain the drawbacks of soil additives and their collective effect on weakening soil nutrition. [SEP] I understand your want for it to be that simple,
-You're nuts. Safer with Bellerin? How? Pace pace pace. Is that all anyone ever talks about around here? What good did it do him when he got burned on the wing? We needed someone to cover when Bellerin was overmatched, which is what good teams do anyway. Debuchy is unquestionably our starter, his place is guaranteed right now. [SEP] You're nuts. Safer with Bellerin? How? Pace pace pace. Is that all anyone ever talks about around here?
->Strangely enough I've seen Loki players pay more attention to minions than hunters/mages. Placing your decoy on a wave to instaclear it requires no effort or skill. Much like playing Loki. >No, it is what Arena has always been. It's just that people who rarely if ever play Arena come into the game mode and think "I'll just try out new gods" and that it's "just Team Deathmatch" Because that's exactly what it is, a team deathmatch. You're playing a game where a single hunter, mage, or even a warrior can instaclear a wave with one ability or 3 basics. Feel free to pretend Arena requires any skill or game knowledge, but in the end it boils down to constant teamfighting with occasional breaks to get buffs while parts of your team spend five seconds rotating to base and back to pick up their items. When I'm learning the mechanics of a new God, of course I'm going to play him in the most braindead, mechanically focused gamemode instead of conquest, where I'd drag the entire team down if I lose my lane because I'm not entirely comfortable with the mechanics of a new God. [SEP] Because that's exactly what it is, a team deathmatch
+How does this make it to the front page? Is ESPN.com down? , but is this game somehow a big deal? [SEP] Not that I watch or care about sports
+Interestingly you just described 2/3's of the gun stores I have ever been too. We as customers need to do a better job of walking away when this is the way a shop likes to treat its customers. [SEP] I know it took me a good long while before I found a shop I am comfortable with...and now I have a strong relationship with the owner/staff and would not dream to go anywhere else.
+Jim doesn't watch other comics and still (poorly) attempts to do specials. Jim is not insightful or educated and still (poorly) pontificates about shit he has no clue about. Jim is an idiot. A quickwitted funny motherfucker, but an idiot nontheless. So I'm not really looking for logic in his actions. [SEP] Jim drank half a can of Miller light, made a prank call and went to rehab, now he's a spokesman for AA.
+I love reading above all, and that's why I can't stand Trails. The dialogue is shallow, repetitive, robotic, and completely devoid of personality. I mostly play games for the story, and I am an avid reader of books, so this smug condescension that anyone who doesn't like it doesn't like story is misguided. I dislike it because I love reading. [SEP] I never once felt like the world or characters came alive because there's no depth to anything. There is no complexity.
+If it's driving you insane then you should totally use the extension, but if it's not something you run up against often, it's handy to know that you can do it without. Unless I've totally misunderstood, which is always probable. [SEP] When it says 'Switch to tab', hold Shift as you press Enter to make it Duplicate the tab.
+Well consider this, if someone who is a chronic alcoholic is given a kidney transplant, and subsequently does not enter into rehabilitation, that alcoholic will then require another kidney later on , thus depriving two other people from receiving the transplant than [SEP] if the original was given to someone who would assuredly take care of their health.
+> Then he leaves Scully with superficialities...so patronizing. Like, a similarly aged Mulder only gets a sheepish glance at himself in the mirror but Scully's age leads her to a midlife crisis about her looks and some yearning for a baby and fears about Mulder finding someone else? Meanwhile, Mulder gets to play it cool? Honest, sincere question: Wasn't Mulder's own, personal "mid-life crisis" already explored quite thoroughly (in more than one instance), though? ...And, in those situations, didn't Scully get the opportunity to "play it cool", as well? More specifically, throughout the Season 10 episode "Mulder and Scully Meet the Were-Monster", Mulder is shown to be quite depressed, frustrated and saddened about his current position/role in life, and how his life has turned out, in general. (He was also shown to have been experiencing similar depression and frustration in "My Struggle", as well as in other episodes.) Scully responded to Mulder's personal crises in a rather cool, glib and lighthearted fashion, in those scenes, with lines such as, "Mulder, have you been taking your meds?", too. So...well, would it have really improved this episode to have Mulder once again reflect upon his mid-life issues? Or, instead, did the reversal in positions add to the overall feeling of "balance" and growth between the characters? Personally, I thought that the latter was true -- and that things might have become too repetitive, if Mulder were to have rehashed all of the issues that he had previously mentioned. Also, as a woman, I actually found the writing of Scully's character to be quite realistic, in this episode. Nearly every single human being on this planet experiences doubts, regrets and insecurities, at some point in their lives (especially as they grow older); that's a perfectly normal experience, and not something that should be looked upon in a negative or judgmental light. So, why can't Scully be shown to experience doubts, regrets and insecurities, as well? In addition, the character of Judy really got into Scully's head, so to speak, and deliberately played upon her personal insecurities for malicious reasons. Wouldn't it have been more "bland" if Scully didn't react to this trickery, at all, and wasn't susceptible to the same self-doubts that the majority of people, in real life, are? Your opinion is totally valid, of course, and I honestly don't mean to sound dismissive or disrespectful; I just find the comments about Scully and Mulder's crises to be very interesting, really. Some fans have mocked Mulder for his mid-life crisis, and others seem to be implying that Scully shouldn't be experiencing such a crisis, at all. Perhaps it's more of a reflection of people (in general)'s subconscious unwillingness to face the fact that, no matter how perfect and well-adjusted they are, they will likely have to struggle with That one day they, too, will have to look back upon their lives in a way that they were never forced to, before -- and that they might not be thrilled with what they see? I don't know if that's the case, but it's been intriguing to read everyone's reactions to how Mulder and Scully, as characters, are personally coping with the aging process... [SEP] severe self-doubt, insecurities and regret, at some stage in their lives?
+> Existence of the self is a philosophical question, Thats silly, I can touch and feel myself, therefore my experience tells me that I exist. If you want to argue that we don't know that we exist, then I'll argue that you don't know that we are anything but a thought in someone else's mind and therefore evolution doesn't exist for us. Nothing about existence can be proven if you can't prove that you yourself exist. Thats a twisted web you've woven here. > Theories are not made up of proofs. > Let's start with "something initiates everything". If I throw a ball, it travels through the air. That is my experience. I don't have to cover for every instance you can conceive of, because if you did, then you can't prove that evolution works prior to the big bang either. Neither of our theories hold true. Debate on both theories is therefore still open. > I also take issue with "the initiating catalyst is termed god". In my experience (i.e. empiric data point), when people talk about the initiating catalyst to existence, it's framed as god. If you want to call such a catalyst something else, thats fine, but evolution in that case doesn't have to be called "evolution" either. You call the initiating catalyst asdasfqewf and I'll call evolution saqsdqfd. [SEP] All theories have a basis in a logical proof. namely that a hypothesis (true) if A + B. For example, the theory of gravity is true if I drop an apple and it falls to the ground.
+I’ll be honest with you here - your posts are absolutely captivating me. The content isn’t really interesting since you’re saying the same thing repeatedly, but the dichotomy between your mastery of English writing and wildly inappropriate use of adjectives is impressive. Solid writing skills, but no one would ever accuse you of giving a measured response. As far as the issue at hand here, I strongly dislike chest gambling so I avoid it. I think $3-$5 for a digital skin (4-600 gems, depending on the quantity you bought) provides HiRez with a more than reasonable profit over 10,000 or so buyers (probably on the low end). I do find it pretty (watch my use of appropriate adjectives here) interesting when players of all sorts of games argue that chests, a clearly anti-consumer system, are a reasonable approach to content delivery. And yes, it is possible for companies to sustain themselves without resorting to unfair practices - more than one way to skin a cat, if you will. [SEP] Someone makes an opposing point and they’re “hysterically arguing,” you find an issue with something they say and you find it “disgusting.”
+You're way behind the times. http Here's another good read for you. http #comment-160 [SEP] You should really try to do something about your anger. A good start would be to stop reading the Orange Papers. The more you feed it, the more it grows. I hope you find some kind of serenity soon.
+Jesus christ, I know you have the best of intentions and all, but the volume of naivety in this subreddit can be flooring sometimes. Let me get this clear -- your grievances with the U.S. are (among other things) "healthcare, finances, the politics are a mess" so you want to move to Argentina and raise cattle and grow weed?! Have you opened a newspaper lately? Do you realize that Argentina is a country with a history of crony politics, fiscal irresponsibility, economic volatility and police corruption? How would you even begin to care for yourself, much less a herd of cows?! You also don't speak the language and would be entirely dependent on your significant other. My favorite part is that you don't want to live in the city, where you could find an expatriate community to lean on for support. No, you want to live in the country, where fewer people speak English and your potential support network is even harder to reach. But of course, you have experience living abroad. For one year. In the UK, studying archaeology. And you're getting unsubstantiated advice from strangers over reddit. Nevermind what I said before, you got this. [SEP] You're not still in high school, so please don't tell me you don't believe there's a chance that something might happen during such a life changing transition that ends your relationship. What are you going to do then?
+> Do not accept casual accusations of abuse, OP. seriously. [SEP] This is a tactic to keep you from mentioning any problems you're having.
+ [SEP] That's just the recycling of certain parts of beings, it doesn't somehow flatten the food chain as if it never existed.
+Ah yes, the word "voluntary". Suppose I tell my boss to keep this job and shove it. I quit and go on my merry way. Meanwhile, my former boss is still barking orders to the poor saps who continue their employment (it commonly takes money to eat). See, me quitting didn't de-archify the boss. You can recognize the archiness of capitalists without thinking it's okay to seize the means of production. You can accept that wage-slavery is real without also wanting to do something about it. I know plenty of wage-slaves who feel this way. They're aware of what's going on, but aren't stirred to action. Have you ever had a shitty job? A shitty boss? It's okay to admit it. [SEP] I'm curious, are you really having trouble understanding these things, or do you think that because it's a justification for theft, that you can't accept any of it?
+offensive? you mean naïve. OP's naïveté is hilarious, poor kid disregards religious gals because of his misguided ideas that religious gals don't put out. clearly he needs an intervention to get some. [SEP] who better to address this than those who know raja beta the best, his mummy-pappa.
+Organizations like the CIA don't give money away without asking for something in return. If the Dalai Lama is on the CIA/NED payroll that would mean he is working for the CIA/NED. If Gandhi had been taking money from the CIA I don't think he would be so highly regarded by supporters of nonviolence. [SEP] If he wasn't concerned about numbers in his bank account why would he accept $180,000 in his personal bank account every year from them? That's a lot of numbers!
+but experience has taught me that "truth" in science is sorely tainted by funding. Did you read the NY Times article I provided? I thought it was put together well and addressed many issues in depth that were not addressed in the official Monsanto document. In the NY Times article "Monsanto scientists and others cite research that has found that mineral deficiencies caused by glysophate can be mitigated with soil additives." I don't know how many soil science majors you've known but it is a pretty common field of study where I am from and most I have known will explain the drawbacks of soil additives and their collective effect on weakening soil nutrition. [SEP] I understand your want for it to be that simple,
+What good did it do him when he got burned on the wing? We needed someone to cover when Bellerin was overmatched, which is what good teams do anyway. Debuchy is unquestionably our starter, his place is guaranteed right now. [SEP] You're nuts. Safer with Bellerin? How? Pace pace pace. Is that all anyone ever talks about around here?
+>Strangely enough I've seen Loki players pay more attention to minions than hunters/mages. Placing your decoy on a wave to instaclear it requires no effort or skill. Much like playing Loki. >No, it is what Arena has always been. It's just that people who rarely if ever play Arena come into the game mode and think "I'll just try out new gods" and that it's "just Team Deathmatch" . You're playing a game where a single hunter, mage, or even a warrior can instaclear a wave with one ability or 3 basics. Feel free to pretend Arena requires any skill or game knowledge, but in the end it boils down to constant teamfighting with occasional breaks to get buffs while parts of your team spend five seconds rotating to base and back to pick up their items. When I'm learning the mechanics of a new God, of course I'm going to play him in the most braindead, mechanically focused gamemode instead of conquest, where I'd drag the entire team down if I lose my lane because I'm not entirely comfortable with the mechanics of a new God. [SEP] Because that's exactly what it is, a team deathmatch
 I'm not defending Factory's behaviour on this thread but his right not to trust women, any woman, ever_. Even his right not to respect women. He has the right to do these things. He has the right to say 'women have to paint the moon purple before I'll respect them' because Factory, like every man, has an absolute right to his feelings. Respect and trust are impossible to provide unless they are provided freely. http [SEP] I'm not defending Factory's behaviour on this thread but his right not to trust women, any woman, ever. Even his right not to respect women.
-> Again, empathy and help are beneficial, but they are not forms of power, I have the power of choice. I can choose to allow people to do things for me and it be socially acceptable because I'm a woman or I can choose to be independent and decline help because that is socially acceptable too. I can also choose to be right in the middle and have the best of both worlds. Feels pretty powerful to me. I consider myself to be extremely powerful because of all the privileges I have as a female. When people help me, they don't "treat me like a vagina" in the sense you define, they don't help me because they think I can't do it myself, people tend to help me without being asked because it's assumed I deserve more help because I'm female and people (mostly male but also female) do it to be nice. I tend to go out of my way to "help" men in ways that are generally reserved for women/females and the reaction tends to be along the lines of "this is new/novel but enjoyable." [SEP] they don't "treat me like a vagina" in the sense you define
-Is this not the Christian subreddit? Do the people on this subreddit believe in what the Bible says or do they not? According to it being "Christian" that means a few things. That means that the Bible is true and there is no questions about what it says. Period. How are these things debatable? On this subreddit homosexuality is sin and there should be no debate about it. Those who do try to debate things that are not debatable, obviously don't know the bible. So therefore their input is of no value and they should not be listened to. You can only debate Scripture with Scripture and as homosexuality is concerned there is no debate to be had. I don't understand how it happened that homosexuality inside the church is considered okay... We are called to be in the world but not of the world. So homosexuality has its place in the unrighteousness of the world but the world hold no value and no righteousness inside the church.. These things are cut and dry. They are not to be debated they are not to be questioned. If the bible says something that means it's true and is therefore of no value to be debated. [SEP] How are these things debatable?
-If you want to go into semantics "there is next to nothing to be learned by average players"... Also why has this turned into a critique of me and my alleged willingness to learn or not, I am merely recounting my experiences from the last months of Trials with different kinds of players. I take away a lot from most matches so please stop implying I am unwilling to learn. [SEP] I take away a lot from most matches so please stop implying I am unwilling to learn.
-Shut up and stop insulting the people you asked for help. Go to the fucking dota subreddit if you act like this. It looks worse than childish as you fabricate insults and insinuations and respond in the most immature and hostile way possible. What the first guy said is true. Even in shit tier dota, keeping your mouth shut and minding your own game, occasionally saying the words push, back, etc. you are very unlikely to run into massive dickheads unprovoked. It is more than likely you with your negative, harassing attitude snapping at people for coughing or sneezing. No one likes to be spoken to like that, thinks your funny, or is even thinking of the things you're talking about. You're doing it to yourself. Don't believe me? Try playing dota without saying a word to anyone for the next ten games. See if you have the same results. I'd bet a thousand dollars it's you and your passive aggressive demeanor. [SEP] Shut up and stop insulting the people you asked for help
-We are a democracy. It's completely possible to be a republic and a democracy. So why should relatively partisan states be forgotten instead? That isn't any more reasonable. As an aside, a little less condescension would probably be appreciated by people you're discussing things with. Just a quick tip. [SEP] As an aside, a little less condescension would probably be appreciated by people you're discussing things with. Just a quick tip.
-Rift owner here: It's not babying, it's a borderline necessity to prevent motion sickness in the average user... which, if you're anything like me, you wouldn't fully understand until you actually had a headset on. Minecraft doesn't use node/teleport, it uses analog stick locomotion. The first few times you play it will be nauseating because you have to move the camera with the right stick in order to adjust your movement direction. Your brain tries to reconcile the fact that your vision and your movement don't feel even remotely natural and causes nausea as a result. Ripcoil, a free game that combines pong with disc jammers, is the worst culprit I've experienced so far with motion sickness, as you need to "lean" at certain degrees to move your platform from side to side. Two of the killer apps for the Rift:. Robo Recall, and Superhot VR (feels like a whole new world compared to the regular version) bypass this motion sickness issue by using a teleporter, which thematically makes sense in RoboRecall, and Superhot VR confines you to a room for each section but puts more emphasis in physically dodging, ducking, and throwing items. Star Trek Bridge Crew is also awesome, but intentionally confined to a chair. I still need to play The Unspoken, Lone Echo, Echo Arena, and Wilson's Heart. [SEP] Minecraft doesn't use node/teleport, it uses analog stick locomotion. The first few times you play it will be nauseating because you have to move the camera with the right stick in order to adjust your movement direction.
-> Here's a question: Say once again there was someone who thought like you but was more competent/intelligent. How would you feel if they wrote you off as not worthy of their time? How would you react going foward knowing their thought process? Would you be able to work with them? Since their opinion would be worth paying attention to, I'd instantly try to see what it is that scared them off and try to file that down until it is no longer an issue. I'd be able to work with them because ultimately I'd focus on their competence and capabilities rather than what they think of me. >All this to say, I believe that intelligence without compassion is a dangerous thing. It becomes too easy to dehumanize others, become arrogant/insufferable, and close yourself off to new knowledge. And if you generalize that type of behaviour (e.g. eugenics), you put yourself at the mercy of others who think similarly. You could easily find yourself on the wrong side of a very arbitrary line. Our entire world is run by people like that. It's the norm, because it works. Your logic would apply if I wanted to do the best I possibly could for the society I live in, but why would I? I can't think of a single logical explanation as to why I should be caring for anyone other than my siblings, girlfriend, and eventual kids. [SEP] Since their opinion would be worth paying attention to, I'd instantly try to see what it is that scared them off and try to file that down until it is no longer an issue.
-sigh The commenter made a point that the drug is sometimes necessary for people who have a condition for reasons beyond old age. I guess you missed that. [SEP] The commenter made a point that the drug is sometimes necessary for people who have a condition for reasons beyond old age. I guess you missed that.
-No offense, but you're a 15-year-old teenage girl. You don't know what love is. You just barely hit puberty, so be a little real with yourself. [SEP] No offense, but you're a 15-year-old teenage girl. You don't know what love is. You just barely hit puberty, so be a little real with yourself.
-> Because no one would ever write "I need a good book, some music, and a nice glass of wine. Or maybe a beer" if they didn't mean "these three things or this one thing." I notice you've completely ignored my argument that it doesn't make logical sense that they would be combined since one would not need to come to a deep understanding of your opponents principles if you plan to simply brutally murder them all. Instead you're debating against an imaginary linguistic argument that I never made. Since we've reached the straw man point of the evening I don't think anything productive can be gained from continuing this. No where did I disagree that they took half measures. I have time and time pointed out, that full measures mean brutally murdering everyone. Not punching someone in the face. Not shouting at them. Not some street scraps. If you're going to follow Hitler's advice your two options are Hitler level brutality of absolute widespread murder until they are annihilated (which I thought we were above, maybe I misjudged everyones crazyness level) or simply ignoring them. Anything in between just makes them stronger according to his argument. This really isn't that complicated, you're trying very hard to find disagreement where there is none accept what is considered misquoting. I just went back and looked at the original, and there's added words and completely different sentence structures. It's not a case of missing ellipses, you're just purely incorrect because it's a complete misquote before you even get to the dishonesty of changing "There's only one Option, A. Or B" to "There's only one option: B". If someone said "There's only one option if you're pregnant, have the baby. Or, alternatively, have an abortion" and they were quoted as "There's only one option if you're pregnant: have an abortion" I'm pretty sure you'd call that a misquote not simply missing ellipses. [SEP] you're trying very hard to find disagreement where there is none accept what is considered misquoting
-http > Even more frightening to Europe are the strategic implications of a Trump presidency. Mr. Trump is rarely clear about his political beliefs, but it is clear that he has a long-held disdain of NATO. He views the Atlantic alliance as a kind of international racket in which the members have to pay the American mob leader for protection. > Mr. Trump has a point: European nations should be doing more to expand and invest in their militaries. But his critique of NATO misunderstands the role of the United States. The alliance functions because his country, the world’s superpower, leads by consent and example, not by threat. Moreover, his repeated suggestion that he would not come to the defense of the Baltic States if they have not “been paying their bills” is an open invitation to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. > Of course that shouldn’t be a surprise. As Europeans have noted with a sense of dread, Mr. Trump seems perfectly comfortable with Russia’s president. He seems to be bothered neither by Mr. Putin’s authoritarian rule, nor his aggression against the international order, nor his meddling in Western democracies. Many worry that Mr. Trump will be willing to strike a grand bargain with Moscow, dividing the world up into spheres of influence. Needless to say, this would divide the Continent and betray the democratic states in Eastern Europe and endanger their newly found independence. > Mr. Putin’s aim is to enhance Russia’s power by undermining and destabilizing Western democracies. He seems to have succeeded in the United States. People in Europe will be watching anxiously to see if the new American president is really Mr. Putin’s useful idiot and if he actually governs along the lines he laid out during the campaign — in other words, if this really will be the end of the West as we know it. [SEP] The alliance functions because his country, the world’s superpower, leads by consent and example, not by threat.
-> Poe is one of the most respected members of the Resistance, Holdo should have found a way to focus Poe and utilize his strengths. This is an extremely desperate time for the Resistance. Not time for Poe hand holding and learning. Poe needs to act like an adult/responsible officer during this time and listen to what Holdo says - stick to his post and await orders. It’s what everyone else on the ship seemed willing to do. [SEP] Not time for Poe hand holding and learning
-This is silly. There is such a thing as freedom of the press in The United States. There's nothing stopping two subsidiaries of the same holding company from having widely different world views and catering to different audiences. Fox News and The New York Post, for instance, are controlled by the same company, but are positively adversarial in their reporting. Furthermore, there is nothing stopping you from going out and starting your own media organization--that's what freedom of the press is about. This MSM, 'fake news' bullshit is getting really fucking old. Grow up. [SEP] There's nothing stopping two subsidiaries of the same holding company from having widely different world views and catering to different audiences
-> I was just mimicking you, giving you a taste of being called "boy" by a total stranger Wasn't referencing that at all, though. Again, you're a pedant because you totally understood what I meant, yet the man I replied to made no sense at all and I wanted him to clarify. [SEP] Again, you're a pedant
->I believe the best approach here is then to poke holes in the statement using whatever definitions you would find appropriate rather than asking me to define terms you think I'm misusing. You do that elsewhere, and I think that's more productive to the conversation. You fail to recognize that what motivates you to continue this conversation need not be well aligned with what motivates me to do the same, and thus what counts as “productive” with respect to my motivations need not necessarily seem “productive” with respect to yours. Some more physical/logical criticisms… …on the theoretical implications of causal locality >I haven't seen this anywhere other than you saying this here…. You also haven’t looked very hard, so I don’t really see why this should matter… >"might" != "will" So what? If you compute a long-term prediction but have to admit at the outset that you don’t know how long it will actually remain accurate because you can’t possibly know whether or not there is anything that will eventually become relevant that has not been accounted for in the computation, it seems rather silly to imagine that prediction as a “perfect” one. …on the pitfalls of waxing quantum with only a cursory, popsci-level comprehension of the subject >…if there is non-local variables influencing variables faster than relativity allows, then that would seem to indicate an informational process that could likewise be exploited to achieve the same speed… I don’t know where you got this idea from. It is well-established that the nonlocal behavior associated with quantum theory cannot be harnessed to exchange information at superluminal speeds. > What did I misrepresent? If the uncertainty principal represents a limitation of nature and I measure the spin, the velocity and location cannot be measured precisely (or in other words are to a point unmeasurable as I put it before). What am I missing here? Well, for one thing, the mathematical structure of the uncertainty principle applies to specific pairs of noncommutable variables (e.g. position versus momentum; spin up versus spin down; etc). There is nothing in the uncertainty principle per se that directly precludes the possibility of simultaneously measuring, say, spin and momentum. (A bonus tidbit: it also pre-existed quantum theory, and is tied up with the mathematics of Fourier transforms) Some more conceptual criticisms >… my original wording was I think quite precise Here’s the thing, though: It doesn’t matter how precise you think your wording is, because regardless of how precise you personally think it is, many (read: most) others will not be able to understand it what it means, even after spending some time thinking on it to try and figure out what you’re trying to say. For its apparent precision (from your perspective) derives from the way the implicit reasoning that underlies the intuitiveness of its structure is all wrapped up and twisted around an implicit inefficiency of thought of which you seem, paradoxically, to be proud. To clarify what I mean by this, note that you’ve repeatedly paid this possibility lip service—that your intuitions may well simply be false. Yet just as repeatedly you shrug this possibility aside as if insignificant to the dialogue. Problem is, that mode of approach only serves to increase the probability that the possibility in question is indeed an actuality, and it does so in a manner that hinders efficient dialogue. >I wasn't attempting to even look at the various implications and extrapolations scientists and philosophers have come up with over the years, just the mathematical inequality principle itself. In your efforts to “[not even attempt to] look at the various implications and extrapolations scientists and philosophers have come up with over the years,” your words suggest an underlying assumption that you actually are looking at “just the mathematical inequality principle itself.” However, you would have to (at minimum) actually understand the mathematics involved in the principle in order to be able to do that. Since you clearly do not yet possess this understanding, what you have actually wound up looking at is your own superficial interpretation of the uncertainty principle, not the uncertainty principle itself. In other words, your conceptualization of this “mathematical inequality principle“ is far too intimately tangled up with your own particular notion of its “implications and extrapolations” to justify calling that conceptualization a conceptualization of the “principle itself”. > If you want to use calculate loosely and thus apply to more semantic predictions, the idea I posited still holds. Why would you ever want to do that? This is a prime example of your willingness to distort a concept in whatever way allows you (implicitly) to sustain your own particular and peculiar preordained conclusions. A challenge: Spot your own conflations—2000 points per >Several lines of your reasoning, for example, read almost like those of a Tegmarkian disciple who takes everything that exists to be “mathematical” or “computational” in nature. > >Which lines are those? I don’t have any inclination to sift back through your previous comments and pick them out. That’s an exercise for you to complete if you’re up to the challenge. Consider it a sort of Where’s Waldo search for conceptualizations conflating overtly mathematical sentiments with overtly physical ones. Tell ya what, though, I will quote one line from your last the give you a head start: >“Is measurement error not a byproduct of calculations?” Ready? Okay, on 3. 1... 2... Go! [SEP] You fail to recognize that what motivates you to continue this conversation need not be well aligned with what motivates me to do the same, and thus what counts as “productive” with respect to my motivations need not necessarily seem “productive” with respect to yours.
->>I am. I go to a lot of politcal events. $300 is cheap! > >Wow, I sure wish I could just blow $300 on seeing a speaker I don't even like. I don't like pence either, but why judge him for spending his money? People had spend more on stupider shit. Some people can afford to throw away 300 to listen to the vice president of the United States speak. Also, I'm pretty sure the 300 is basically donation to the GOP. If he was willing to do that to begin with, the only thing he's spending is his time. Hell I don't care about sports either and people spend hundreds on tickets, sometimes for teams they don't support. Who am I to make sarcastic remarks about that? [SEP] but why judge him for spending his money?
->I'm not particularly interested in being unoffensive, but I wasn't trying to shove anything down his throat. Do you not see the contradiction here? >I was obviously asking leading questions, because those are the questions I'm interested in the answers to. You can ask the same questions without implying that you want a specific answer. But that seems to be a bit out of your reach at present. [SEP] You can ask the same questions without implying that you want a specific answer. But that seems to be a bit out of your reach at present.
-I've been accused of speaking pretentiously, and it's really not intentional. That's just how I talk. I always just assume that if I come across that way to someone, they must be insecure about their vocabulary or diction or whatever. I understand what you're saying, and I agree that there are certainly people out there who intentionally speak in ways that they'll be perceived as more intelligent than they might be. There are some of us who use SAT vocabulary words in regular speech just because that's how we think, though. [SEP] There are some of us who use SAT vocabulary words in regular speech just because that's how we think, though.
-> Says the person who just argued with a Strawman I said I'd post so they would have something tangible to argue with rather than just make believe. Dude, you said he's a christian because he says so and he has followers several times. This is just pathetic. Claiming some victory is really, really sad. I hope you don't act like this outside of Reddit. [SEP] I hope you don't act like this outside of Reddit.
+> Again, empathy and help are beneficial, but they are not forms of power, I have the power of choice. I can choose to allow people to do things for me and it be socially acceptable because I'm a woman or I can choose to be independent and decline help because that is socially acceptable too. I can also choose to be right in the middle and have the best of both worlds. Feels pretty powerful to me. I consider myself to be extremely powerful because of all the privileges I have as a female. When people help me, , they don't help me because they think I can't do it myself, people tend to help me without being asked because it's assumed I deserve more help because I'm female and people (mostly male but also female) do it to be nice. I tend to go out of my way to "help" men in ways that are generally reserved for women/females and the reaction tends to be along the lines of "this is new/novel but enjoyable." [SEP] they don't "treat me like a vagina" in the sense you define
+Is this not the Christian subreddit? Do the people on this subreddit believe in what the Bible says or do they not? According to it being "Christian" that means a few things. That means that the Bible is true and there is no questions about what it says. Period. On this subreddit homosexuality is sin and there should be no debate about it. Those who do try to debate things that are not debatable, obviously don't know the bible. So therefore their input is of no value and they should not be listened to. You can only debate Scripture with Scripture and as homosexuality is concerned there is no debate to be had. I don't understand how it happened that homosexuality inside the church is considered okay... We are called to be in the world but not of the world. So homosexuality has its place in the unrighteousness of the world but the world hold no value and no righteousness inside the church.. These things are cut and dry. They are not to be debated they are not to be questioned. If the bible says something that means it's true and is therefore of no value to be debated. [SEP] How are these things debatable?
+If you want to go into semantics "there is next to nothing to be learned by average players"... Also why has this turned into a critique of me and my alleged willingness to learn or not, I am merely recounting my experiences from the last months of Trials with different kinds of players. [SEP] I take away a lot from most matches so please stop implying I am unwilling to learn.
+. Go to the fucking dota subreddit if you act like this. It looks worse than childish as you fabricate insults and insinuations and respond in the most immature and hostile way possible. What the first guy said is true. Even in shit tier dota, keeping your mouth shut and minding your own game, occasionally saying the words push, back, etc. you are very unlikely to run into massive dickheads unprovoked. It is more than likely you with your negative, harassing attitude snapping at people for coughing or sneezing. No one likes to be spoken to like that, thinks your funny, or is even thinking of the things you're talking about. You're doing it to yourself. Don't believe me? Try playing dota without saying a word to anyone for the next ten games. See if you have the same results. I'd bet a thousand dollars it's you and your passive aggressive demeanor. [SEP] Shut up and stop insulting the people you asked for help
+We are a democracy. It's completely possible to be a republic and a democracy. So why should relatively partisan states be forgotten instead? That isn't any more reasonable. [SEP] As an aside, a little less condescension would probably be appreciated by people you're discussing things with. Just a quick tip.
+Rift owner here: It's not babying, it's a borderline necessity to prevent motion sickness in the average user... which, if you're anything like me, you wouldn't fully understand until you actually had a headset on. Your brain tries to reconcile the fact that your vision and your movement don't feel even remotely natural and causes nausea as a result. Ripcoil, a free game that combines pong with disc jammers, is the worst culprit I've experienced so far with motion sickness, as you need to "lean" at certain degrees to move your platform from side to side. Two of the killer apps for the Rift:. Robo Recall, and Superhot VR (feels like a whole new world compared to the regular version) bypass this motion sickness issue by using a teleporter, which thematically makes sense in RoboRecall, and Superhot VR confines you to a room for each section but puts more emphasis in physically dodging, ducking, and throwing items. Star Trek Bridge Crew is also awesome, but intentionally confined to a chair. I still need to play The Unspoken, Lone Echo, Echo Arena, and Wilson's Heart. [SEP] Minecraft doesn't use node/teleport, it uses analog stick locomotion. The first few times you play it will be nauseating because you have to move the camera with the right stick in order to adjust your movement direction.
+> Here's a question: Say once again there was someone who thought like you but was more competent/intelligent. How would you feel if they wrote you off as not worthy of their time? How would you react going foward knowing their thought process? Would you be able to work with them? I'd be able to work with them because ultimately I'd focus on their competence and capabilities rather than what they think of me. >All this to say, I believe that intelligence without compassion is a dangerous thing. It becomes too easy to dehumanize others, become arrogant/insufferable, and close yourself off to new knowledge. And if you generalize that type of behaviour (e.g. eugenics), you put yourself at the mercy of others who think similarly. You could easily find yourself on the wrong side of a very arbitrary line. Our entire world is run by people like that. It's the norm, because it works. Your logic would apply if I wanted to do the best I possibly could for the society I live in, but why would I? I can't think of a single logical explanation as to why I should be caring for anyone other than my siblings, girlfriend, and eventual kids. [SEP] Since their opinion would be worth paying attention to, I'd instantly try to see what it is that scared them off and try to file that down until it is no longer an issue.
+sigh [SEP] The commenter made a point that the drug is sometimes necessary for people who have a condition for reasons beyond old age. I guess you missed that.
+ [SEP] No offense, but you're a 15-year-old teenage girl. You don't know what love is. You just barely hit puberty, so be a little real with yourself.
+> Because no one would ever write "I need a good book, some music, and a nice glass of wine. Or maybe a beer" if they didn't mean "these three things or this one thing." I notice you've completely ignored my argument that it doesn't make logical sense that they would be combined since one would not need to come to a deep understanding of your opponents principles if you plan to simply brutally murder them all. Instead you're debating against an imaginary linguistic argument that I never made. Since we've reached the straw man point of the evening I don't think anything productive can be gained from continuing this. No where did I disagree that they took half measures. I have time and time pointed out, that full measures mean brutally murdering everyone. Not punching someone in the face. Not shouting at them. Not some street scraps. If you're going to follow Hitler's advice your two options are Hitler level brutality of absolute widespread murder until they are annihilated (which I thought we were above, maybe I misjudged everyones crazyness level) or simply ignoring them. Anything in between just makes them stronger according to his argument. This really isn't that complicated, . I just went back and looked at the original, and there's added words and completely different sentence structures. It's not a case of missing ellipses, you're just purely incorrect because it's a complete misquote before you even get to the dishonesty of changing "There's only one Option, A. Or B" to "There's only one option: B". If someone said "There's only one option if you're pregnant, have the baby. Or, alternatively, have an abortion" and they were quoted as "There's only one option if you're pregnant: have an abortion" I'm pretty sure you'd call that a misquote not simply missing ellipses. [SEP] you're trying very hard to find disagreement where there is none accept what is considered misquoting
+http > Even more frightening to Europe are the strategic implications of a Trump presidency. Mr. Trump is rarely clear about his political beliefs, but it is clear that he has a long-held disdain of NATO. He views the Atlantic alliance as a kind of international racket in which the members have to pay the American mob leader for protection. > Mr. Trump has a point: European nations should be doing more to expand and invest in their militaries. But his critique of NATO misunderstands the role of the United States. Moreover, his repeated suggestion that he would not come to the defense of the Baltic States if they have not “been paying their bills” is an open invitation to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. > Of course that shouldn’t be a surprise. As Europeans have noted with a sense of dread, Mr. Trump seems perfectly comfortable with Russia’s president. He seems to be bothered neither by Mr. Putin’s authoritarian rule, nor his aggression against the international order, nor his meddling in Western democracies. Many worry that Mr. Trump will be willing to strike a grand bargain with Moscow, dividing the world up into spheres of influence. Needless to say, this would divide the Continent and betray the democratic states in Eastern Europe and endanger their newly found independence. > Mr. Putin’s aim is to enhance Russia’s power by undermining and destabilizing Western democracies. He seems to have succeeded in the United States. People in Europe will be watching anxiously to see if the new American president is really Mr. Putin’s useful idiot and if he actually governs along the lines he laid out during the campaign — in other words, if this really will be the end of the West as we know it. [SEP] The alliance functions because his country, the world’s superpower, leads by consent and example, not by threat.
+> Poe is one of the most respected members of the Resistance, Holdo should have found a way to focus Poe and utilize his strengths. This is an extremely desperate time for the Resistance. . Poe needs to act like an adult/responsible officer during this time and listen to what Holdo says - stick to his post and await orders. It’s what everyone else on the ship seemed willing to do. [SEP] Not time for Poe hand holding and learning
+This is silly. There is such a thing as freedom of the press in The United States. . Fox News and The New York Post, for instance, are controlled by the same company, but are positively adversarial in their reporting. Furthermore, there is nothing stopping you from going out and starting your own media organization--that's what freedom of the press is about. This MSM, 'fake news' bullshit is getting really fucking old. Grow up. [SEP] There's nothing stopping two subsidiaries of the same holding company from having widely different world views and catering to different audiences
+> I was just mimicking you, giving you a taste of being called "boy" by a total stranger Wasn't referencing that at all, though. because you totally understood what I meant, yet the man I replied to made no sense at all and I wanted him to clarify. [SEP] Again, you're a pedant
+>I believe the best approach here is then to poke holes in the statement using whatever definitions you would find appropriate rather than asking me to define terms you think I'm misusing. You do that elsewhere, and I think that's more productive to the conversation. Some more physical/logical criticisms… …on the theoretical implications of causal locality >I haven't seen this anywhere other than you saying this here…. You also haven’t looked very hard, so I don’t really see why this should matter… >"might" != "will" So what? If you compute a long-term prediction but have to admit at the outset that you don’t know how long it will actually remain accurate because you can’t possibly know whether or not there is anything that will eventually become relevant that has not been accounted for in the computation, it seems rather silly to imagine that prediction as a “perfect” one. …on the pitfalls of waxing quantum with only a cursory, popsci-level comprehension of the subject >…if there is non-local variables influencing variables faster than relativity allows, then that would seem to indicate an informational process that could likewise be exploited to achieve the same speed… I don’t know where you got this idea from. It is well-established that the nonlocal behavior associated with quantum theory cannot be harnessed to exchange information at superluminal speeds. > What did I misrepresent? If the uncertainty principal represents a limitation of nature and I measure the spin, the velocity and location cannot be measured precisely (or in other words are to a point unmeasurable as I put it before). What am I missing here? Well, for one thing, the mathematical structure of the uncertainty principle applies to specific pairs of noncommutable variables (e.g. position versus momentum; spin up versus spin down; etc). There is nothing in the uncertainty principle per se that directly precludes the possibility of simultaneously measuring, say, spin and momentum. (A bonus tidbit: it also pre-existed quantum theory, and is tied up with the mathematics of Fourier transforms) Some more conceptual criticisms >… my original wording was I think quite precise Here’s the thing, though: It doesn’t matter how precise you think your wording is, because regardless of how precise you personally think it is, many (read: most) others will not be able to understand it what it means, even after spending some time thinking on it to try and figure out what you’re trying to say. For its apparent precision (from your perspective) derives from the way the implicit reasoning that underlies the intuitiveness of its structure is all wrapped up and twisted around an implicit inefficiency of thought of which you seem, paradoxically, to be proud. To clarify what I mean by this, note that you’ve repeatedly paid this possibility lip service—that your intuitions may well simply be false. Yet just as repeatedly you shrug this possibility aside as if insignificant to the dialogue. Problem is, that mode of approach only serves to increase the probability that the possibility in question is indeed an actuality, and it does so in a manner that hinders efficient dialogue. >I wasn't attempting to even look at the various implications and extrapolations scientists and philosophers have come up with over the years, just the mathematical inequality principle itself. In your efforts to “[not even attempt to] look at the various implications and extrapolations scientists and philosophers have come up with over the years,” your words suggest an underlying assumption that you actually are looking at “just the mathematical inequality principle itself.” However, you would have to (at minimum) actually understand the mathematics involved in the principle in order to be able to do that. Since you clearly do not yet possess this understanding, what you have actually wound up looking at is your own superficial interpretation of the uncertainty principle, not the uncertainty principle itself. In other words, your conceptualization of this “mathematical inequality principle“ is far too intimately tangled up with your own particular notion of its “implications and extrapolations” to justify calling that conceptualization a conceptualization of the “principle itself”. > If you want to use calculate loosely and thus apply to more semantic predictions, the idea I posited still holds. Why would you ever want to do that? This is a prime example of your willingness to distort a concept in whatever way allows you (implicitly) to sustain your own particular and peculiar preordained conclusions. A challenge: Spot your own conflations—2000 points per >Several lines of your reasoning, for example, read almost like those of a Tegmarkian disciple who takes everything that exists to be “mathematical” or “computational” in nature. > >Which lines are those? I don’t have any inclination to sift back through your previous comments and pick them out. That’s an exercise for you to complete if you’re up to the challenge. Consider it a sort of Where’s Waldo search for conceptualizations conflating overtly mathematical sentiments with overtly physical ones. Tell ya what, though, I will quote one line from your last the give you a head start: >“Is measurement error not a byproduct of calculations?” Ready? Okay, on 3. 1... 2... Go! [SEP] You fail to recognize that what motivates you to continue this conversation need not be well aligned with what motivates me to do the same, and thus what counts as “productive” with respect to my motivations need not necessarily seem “productive” with respect to yours.
+>>I am. I go to a lot of politcal events. $300 is cheap! > >Wow, I sure wish I could just blow $300 on seeing a speaker I don't even like. I don't like pence either, People had spend more on stupider shit. Some people can afford to throw away 300 to listen to the vice president of the United States speak. Also, I'm pretty sure the 300 is basically donation to the GOP. If he was willing to do that to begin with, the only thing he's spending is his time. Hell I don't care about sports either and people spend hundreds on tickets, sometimes for teams they don't support. Who am I to make sarcastic remarks about that? [SEP] but why judge him for spending his money?
+>I'm not particularly interested in being unoffensive, but I wasn't trying to shove anything down his throat. Do you not see the contradiction here? >I was obviously asking leading questions, because those are the questions I'm interested in the answers to. [SEP] You can ask the same questions without implying that you want a specific answer. But that seems to be a bit out of your reach at present.
+I've been accused of speaking pretentiously, and it's really not intentional. That's just how I talk. I always just assume that if I come across that way to someone, they must be insecure about their vocabulary or diction or whatever. I understand what you're saying, and I agree that there are certainly people out there who intentionally speak in ways that they'll be perceived as more intelligent than they might be. [SEP] There are some of us who use SAT vocabulary words in regular speech just because that's how we think, though.
+> Says the person who just argued with a Strawman I said I'd post so they would have something tangible to argue with rather than just make believe. Dude, you said he's a christian because he says so and he has followers several times. This is just pathetic. Claiming some victory is really, really sad. [SEP] I hope you don't act like this outside of Reddit.
 Feel free to play, but expect to not come home a huge winner. View the money as a fun-category expense. [SEP] feel free to play, but expect to not come home a ~~huge~~ winner.
-I mean they aren’t comparable in all situations, but I wasn’t trying to debate, just curious. There are a lot of possible reasons people have — difference in intelligence, difference in species (ie they aren’t part of our “group”), or religious reasons, so I was just curious what your specific reason was. No worries if it’s hard to explain, I understand it’s one of those gut instinct type things that can be hard to verbalize for some people. [SEP] No worries if it’s hard to explain, I understand it’s one of those gut instinct type things that can be hard to verbalize for some people.
-Fans contribute views, Sponsors contribute money. And your wrong about it being boring. It's different and they don't understand it. In basketball, fans used to think a "slam dunk" was show boating and distasteful. Now it is glorified and shown in highlight reels. Fans change their mind when a new understanding of a strategy is explained. [SEP] It's different and they don't understand it.
-> Would you say then religion is good for most of the people in it, ... and for a few folks atheism works just fine for society? Absolutely. And I have no problem with atheism. I do have a problem with atheists that make assumptions about my ability to reason (which tends to be their biggest negative assumption). > Are you saying that it doesn't matter if what you have faith in is true? That's not what I was saying with that quoted line. I was saying that even an atheist will have faith in something. [SEP] I do have a problem with atheists that make assumptions about my ability to reason
-I do not know your sex or gender, so I do not know how I could be policing it. (S)He was being emotional (in this reply to me you are being emotional as well), so I told him and you to chill out, and hopefully, reread the comment with less of a knee-jerk reaction. [SEP] reread the comment with less of a knee-jerk reaction.
-> I disagree obviously. Why aren't per attempt numbers good for the playoffs? That's the whole point of per-play metrics, they're good anywhere. And no, I don't agree that consistency matters all that much. What if your defense gives up 40 points that day? You still want the guy that'll throw only exactly 2 TDs? For the reasons I said and will reiterate: 1. Consistency: Who cares if a QB goes off in the Wild Card round only to choke later? A QB that plays well every game gives his team the best chance to advance into the playoffs. 2. Stakes. A pass in the Wild Card simply doesn't have the same weight as one in the Super Bowl. If they were, then the playoffs would just be an extension of the regular season and championships wouldn't matter. > So Peyton is better in the WC and AFCCG, while Brady is better in divisional games and the super bowl. I don't see how any reasonable person can look at this and say Brady is much better in the playoffs? Again, overall QB rating is simply misleading. Brady's overall Wild Card rating is significantly worse than Manning's. Yet, if you split it by game (of which Brady's only played 3 to Peyton's 7): Year | Rating | Result -|-|- 2006 | 116.4 | W 2007 | 101.6 | W 2009 | 49.1 | L So, Brady has actually had a higher percentage of good games played and therefore a higher chance of advancing to the Divisional round from the Wild Card round relative to Manning. That Manning played so much better in his 2 WC wins doesn't really matter in terms of reaching the next round of the playoffs. He had 5 other games of mediocre to bad performances, and so has a 3-4 record. Peyton also has a higher rating in the AFCC round than Brady, but not significantly so (6 points), certainly not enough to cover the disparity in Super Bowl performances (18 points, 4 vs 7 games), which many consider the most important game of the season. Because Peyton has played better on average in the AFCC, he has a higher percentage to advance to the Super Bowl as reflected in their AFCC records (4-1 vs 7-4)...but of course, Peyton would make it to the AFCC more if he didn't lose so often in the earlier rounds. Of course, I looked at the Wild Card round on a per-game basis to make Brady look better even though Manning had a better overall rating by 18 points, so it's only fair to look at the Super Bowl round on a per-game basis in case Manning actually looks better: QB | Super Bowl QB Ratings (best to worst) - | - Peyton | 88.5 (L), 81.8 (W), 73.5 (L), 56.6 (W) Brady | 110.2 (W), 101.1 (W), 100.5 (W), 95.2 (W), 91.1 (L), 86.2 (W), 82.5 (L) In this case, the overall Super Bowl passer rating is fairly representative of their records. Brady went 4-0 in games he played at least decently (95+), and 1-2 otherwise. Manning did not have a single good outing in the Super Bowl, and went 2-2. Let's come back to consistency, something per-attempt stats simply don't measure. Consider that together Peyton and Brady are 17-1 when they have a passer rating over 100. Brady accounts for 12 of those in 34 games (35%), Peyton 6 in 27 games (22%). Brady has 1 game with a passer rating below 50. Manning has 3. As another measure of consistency, let's consider how many times they've had multiple TD's vs 0 TD's and multi-INT vs 0-INT: Note: Units are in games, with percentage of games in parentheses QB | multi-TD | 0-TD | multi-INT | 0-INT -|-|-|-|- Brady | 20 (58%) | 4 (12%) | 9 (26%) | 15 (44%) Manning | 10 (37%) | 6 (22%) | 7 (26%) | 12 (44%) They have similar INT-count probability distributions, but Brady has a higher chance per-game of throwing multiple TDs and a lower chance of laying an egg. Simply put, on a game-to-game basis, Brady has a higher probability of playing well and a lower probability of playing like crap, and that consistency is extremely important in a single-elimination tournament like the NFL playoffs. So while looking at per-attempt playoff stats stripped of all context, you may wonder why people think Brady is better than Peyton. But me, I wonder how anyone could think otherwise if they actually watch the games. And we didn't even get around to Peyton's surrounding offensive talent and how that might relatively inflate his numbers. [SEP] In this case, the overall Super Bowl passer rating is fairly representative of their records. Brady went 4-0 in games he played at least decently (95+), and 1-2 otherwise. Manning did not have a single good outing in the Super Bowl, and went 2-2.
-What you stated on free trade is right, but none of that is in regards to the TPP, except maybe the IP. However, as we have seen, greater control over IP means higher costs for everyone. Dont believe me? Look at the IP abuses seen here in the USA. There are plenty of tax loopholes to fix, such as allowing money to be gathered overseas for US based businesses, such as investor loopholes... none of that has done what it was supposed to do. As for the tax credits... what companies actually hire based on that? No company says "we wont hire more people because we dont have a tax credit"... they hire people when they need to. If they are doing well, they will hire, if they are not, they will not. That is what drives hiring and firing, not Tax credits... Want proof? Look at Kansas. Read up on this for the SSDI raiding As for the wealthy fare share.... did you know when the economy was healthy, it was up to 95% tax on wealthy income? How about we try it at 50% and see where that takes us. There is no rhetoric here, just lack of knowledge. Discussion and discourse brings out this information and thus, allows us to grow as a society. [SEP] As for the tax credits... what companies actually hire based on that? No company says "we wont hire more people because we dont have a tax credit"... they hire people when they need to. If they are doing well, they will hire, if they are not, they will not. That is what drives hiring and firing, not Tax credits... Want proof?
-Oh so you are one of those don't trust doctors people. Good to know. > When someone says something that is demonstrably false Nothing I have linked is demonstrably false. You may disagree with it but it's not false. You may think there are better ways to do it but it's not false. Sorry if it doesn't jive with your world view but nothing I have said is false. [SEP] Oh so you are one of those don't trust doctors people. Good to know.
-"to my knowledge they do not." Consider yourself educated: the MPAA has already threatened to sue public schools for using short clips from movies in the classroom setting. "there is a giant gaping difference, etc. etc." To YOU, maybe. To the RIAA and the MPAA? NO. [SEP] Consider yourself educated
-Why is it only in the GPU market that people think company A making tech that only works on company A's other hardware anti-competitive? Do we scream at Apple for not letting Android have iMessage, or iCloud? Do we scream at Google for not letting iPhones have MicroSD support? God, learn how the fucking market works guys. [SEP] God, learn how the fucking market works guys.
-After a few hundred, it stops carrying any meaning other than "One step closer to my next publication." Keep at it! [SEP] "One step closer to my next publication."
-I want to be annoyed, but I'm not. (edit: I think the only reason I would be annoyed if the page was overrun with fluffy kittens or something...and even then...) Sure, it's a blatant attempt to market towards women..but is that so bad? Nothing on the page seems disrespectful or sexist..and if you look further they've even got a laptop skin line with MLB tie in that appears to be aimed towards males. [SEP] Sure, it's a blatant attempt to market towards women..but is that so bad?
+I mean they aren’t comparable in all situations, but I wasn’t trying to debate, just curious. There are a lot of possible reasons people have — difference in intelligence, difference in species (ie they aren’t part of our “group”), or religious reasons, so I was just curious what your specific reason was. [SEP] No worries if it’s hard to explain, I understand it’s one of those gut instinct type things that can be hard to verbalize for some people.
+Fans contribute views, Sponsors contribute money. And your wrong about it being boring. In basketball, fans used to think a "slam dunk" was show boating and distasteful. Now it is glorified and shown in highlight reels. Fans change their mind when a new understanding of a strategy is explained. [SEP] It's different and they don't understand it.
+> Would you say then religion is good for most of the people in it, ... and for a few folks atheism works just fine for society? Absolutely. And I have no problem with atheism. (which tends to be their biggest negative assumption). > Are you saying that it doesn't matter if what you have faith in is true? That's not what I was saying with that quoted line. I was saying that even an atheist will have faith in something. [SEP] I do have a problem with atheists that make assumptions about my ability to reason
+I do not know your sex or gender, so I do not know how I could be policing it. (S)He was being emotional (in this reply to me you are being emotional as well), so I told him and you to chill out, and hopefully, [SEP] reread the comment with less of a knee-jerk reaction.
+> I disagree obviously. Why aren't per attempt numbers good for the playoffs? That's the whole point of per-play metrics, they're good anywhere. And no, I don't agree that consistency matters all that much. What if your defense gives up 40 points that day? You still want the guy that'll throw only exactly 2 TDs? For the reasons I said and will reiterate: 1. Consistency: Who cares if a QB goes off in the Wild Card round only to choke later? A QB that plays well every game gives his team the best chance to advance into the playoffs. 2. Stakes. A pass in the Wild Card simply doesn't have the same weight as one in the Super Bowl. If they were, then the playoffs would just be an extension of the regular season and championships wouldn't matter. > So Peyton is better in the WC and AFCCG, while Brady is better in divisional games and the super bowl. I don't see how any reasonable person can look at this and say Brady is much better in the playoffs? Again, overall QB rating is simply misleading. Brady's overall Wild Card rating is significantly worse than Manning's. Yet, if you split it by game (of which Brady's only played 3 to Peyton's 7): Year | Rating | Result -|-|- 2006 | 116.4 | W 2007 | 101.6 | W 2009 | 49.1 | L So, Brady has actually had a higher percentage of good games played and therefore a higher chance of advancing to the Divisional round from the Wild Card round relative to Manning. That Manning played so much better in his 2 WC wins doesn't really matter in terms of reaching the next round of the playoffs. He had 5 other games of mediocre to bad performances, and so has a 3-4 record. Peyton also has a higher rating in the AFCC round than Brady, but not significantly so (6 points), certainly not enough to cover the disparity in Super Bowl performances (18 points, 4 vs 7 games), which many consider the most important game of the season. Because Peyton has played better on average in the AFCC, he has a higher percentage to advance to the Super Bowl as reflected in their AFCC records (4-1 vs 7-4)...but of course, Peyton would make it to the AFCC more if he didn't lose so often in the earlier rounds. Of course, I looked at the Wild Card round on a per-game basis to make Brady look better even though Manning had a better overall rating by 18 points, so it's only fair to look at the Super Bowl round on a per-game basis in case Manning actually looks better: QB | Super Bowl QB Ratings (best to worst) - | - Peyton | 88.5 (L), 81.8 (W), 73.5 (L), 56.6 (W) Brady | 110.2 (W), 101.1 (W), 100.5 (W), 95.2 (W), 91.1 (L), 86.2 (W), 82.5 (L) Let's come back to consistency, something per-attempt stats simply don't measure. Consider that together Peyton and Brady are 17-1 when they have a passer rating over 100. Brady accounts for 12 of those in 34 games (35%), Peyton 6 in 27 games (22%). Brady has 1 game with a passer rating below 50. Manning has 3. As another measure of consistency, let's consider how many times they've had multiple TD's vs 0 TD's and multi-INT vs 0-INT: Note: Units are in games, with percentage of games in parentheses QB | multi-TD | 0-TD | multi-INT | 0-INT -|-|-|-|- Brady | 20 (58%) | 4 (12%) | 9 (26%) | 15 (44%) Manning | 10 (37%) | 6 (22%) | 7 (26%) | 12 (44%) They have similar INT-count probability distributions, but Brady has a higher chance per-game of throwing multiple TDs and a lower chance of laying an egg. Simply put, on a game-to-game basis, Brady has a higher probability of playing well and a lower probability of playing like crap, and that consistency is extremely important in a single-elimination tournament like the NFL playoffs. So while looking at per-attempt playoff stats stripped of all context, you may wonder why people think Brady is better than Peyton. But me, I wonder how anyone could think otherwise if they actually watch the games. And we didn't even get around to Peyton's surrounding offensive talent and how that might relatively inflate his numbers. [SEP] In this case, the overall Super Bowl passer rating is fairly representative of their records. Brady went 4-0 in games he played at least decently (95+), and 1-2 otherwise. Manning did not have a single good outing in the Super Bowl, and went 2-2.
+What you stated on free trade is right, but none of that is in regards to the TPP, except maybe the IP. However, as we have seen, greater control over IP means higher costs for everyone. Dont believe me? Look at the IP abuses seen here in the USA. There are plenty of tax loopholes to fix, such as allowing money to be gathered overseas for US based businesses, such as investor loopholes... none of that has done what it was supposed to do. Look at Kansas. Read up on this for the SSDI raiding As for the wealthy fare share.... did you know when the economy was healthy, it was up to 95% tax on wealthy income? How about we try it at 50% and see where that takes us. There is no rhetoric here, just lack of knowledge. Discussion and discourse brings out this information and thus, allows us to grow as a society. [SEP] As for the tax credits... what companies actually hire based on that? No company says "we wont hire more people because we dont have a tax credit"... they hire people when they need to. If they are doing well, they will hire, if they are not, they will not. That is what drives hiring and firing, not Tax credits... Want proof?
+> When someone says something that is demonstrably false Nothing I have linked is demonstrably false. You may disagree with it but it's not false. You may think there are better ways to do it but it's not false. Sorry if it doesn't jive with your world view but nothing I have said is false. [SEP] Oh so you are one of those don't trust doctors people. Good to know.
+"to my knowledge they do not." : the MPAA has already threatened to sue public schools for using short clips from movies in the classroom setting. "there is a giant gaping difference, etc. etc." To YOU, maybe. To the RIAA and the MPAA? NO. [SEP] Consider yourself educated
+Why is it only in the GPU market that people think company A making tech that only works on company A's other hardware anti-competitive? Do we scream at Apple for not letting Android have iMessage, or iCloud? Do we scream at Google for not letting iPhones have MicroSD support? [SEP] God, learn how the fucking market works guys.
+After a few hundred, it stops carrying any meaning other than Keep at it! [SEP] "One step closer to my next publication."
+I want to be annoyed, but I'm not. (edit: I think the only reason I would be annoyed if the page was overrun with fluffy kittens or something...and even then...) Nothing on the page seems disrespectful or sexist..and if you look further they've even got a laptop skin line with MLB tie in that appears to be aimed towards males. [SEP] Sure, it's a blatant attempt to market towards women..but is that so bad?
 Only an idiot could possibly conclude that french fries, which are a preservative-filled starch fried in fat and covered in salt, can be considered vegetables. I realize that fast food is made in bulk and it's quite cheap, but there's no excuse whatsoever for students, people not yet old enough to vote, drink, (many) drive, or live on their own to "choose" to eat nothing but fried salty starch full of preservatives for lunch. It's negligence, pure and simple. You know what schools can also get in bulk for cheap? Brown rice. Whole oats. Lentils. All of these can be shipped en masse all over the US and can be made into cheap, healthy, and filling foods. Edit: in fact, all you need is brown rice, a bit of soy sauce, and perhaps some ginger and garlic to make something kids would actually eat. How could that possibly be more expensive than peeled, cut, processed, freeze-dried potatoes fried in oil (even the cheapest oil being fairly expensive). [SEP] How could that possibly be more expensive [?]
-Let me make this really simple. You work at UPS. Revenue is down because people stopped buying your services as much. UPS is not a charity that prints money from thin air, so they have to let you go. Or the migrant workers start spending money buying stuff. This benefits UPS since they sell stuff the migrant workers buy. Now UPS has enough money to not let you go. [SEP] Let me make this really simple.
-> It's amazing how being hamstrung into using the previous coach's playbook and injuries decimating an already thin roster have affected people's perception of Mel Tucker in one year. I disagree. Tucker went from the Browns to the Jags to the post-Lovie Bears where he shat the bed as guys got hurt. I'm not blaming him for 2013, but there's no doubt in my mind that he isn't going to get that defense back to greatness. He was DC for one year with the Browns, and they didn't keep him. Here are his defense's rankings 3 years in Jacksonville: - 2009: 4.1 YPC (11th), 67.6% completion percentage (31st), 27th in passing yards, 96 passer rating (30th), 14 sacks (32nd), 7.0 net adjusted yards per pass attempt (30th), 7.6 YPA (27th) - 2010: 4.7 YPC (28th), 65% completion percentage (28th), 28th in passing yards, 98.5 passer rating (31st), 26 sacks (30th), 7.5 adjusted net yards per pass attempt (32nd), 8.3 YPA (32nd) - 2011: 3.8 YPC (5th), 63.5% completion percentage (29th), 8th in passing yards, 83.7 passer rating (16th), 31 sacks (25th), 5.5 adjusted net yards per pass attempt (25th), 6.9 YPA (13th) And then PPG: - 2009: 23.8 (24th) - 2010: 26.2 (27th) - 2011: 20.6 (11th) Tucker had one average season in Jacksonville (2011), and I would say some of it had to do with the offense sucking (15.2 PPG in 2011, 22.1 in 2010, and 18.1 in 2009) and opponents going conservative sooner. >The reason they couldn't stop the run was a lot of things, like Peppers giving up when Lovie was canned. Like having an OLB playing end in McClellan, a DE playing DT in Wootton, and a practice squad player playing NT in Cohen. Tucker couldn't change any of these things. I'm not arguing that the Bears 2013 defense was Tuckers fault. That shit was a dumpster fire due to injuries. What I am saying is that Tucker has never been involved with a winning NFL team, doesn't know what it looks like, and has never produced a top ten defensive unit. And now he gets to deal with a post-Lovie defense, players like Peppers who respected Lovie but not Tucker, aging veterans who know the old system, young guys who need to get up to speed in the NFL, and FAs, and all of them need to come together under a new scheme. That's a tough job for anyone, and I don't believe Tucker is an above-average DC. [SEP] He was DC for one year with the Browns, and they didn't keep him.
-> I'm okay with allowing the tech community to decide what's worth talking about. Do you understand the concept of rules in a subreddit and pointing to a more suitable sub? If the people like a stunt driver jumping over 16 cars that doesn't mean that it should be upvoted in /r/aww. Upvotes show the interest in a topic, not whether it's even in the right sub. You understand that right? [SEP] Do you understand the concept of rules in a subreddit and pointing to a more suitable sub?
-The stance you're taking on the matter is too much of a technical one, understandable seing your background. However, you can pretty much assume, as long as not proved otherwise that people don't understand/don't care about the technical point and exactitude of the terms they use in a contexte such as this one. The conversation never went from a design perspective to a technical one, because when OP said "play test", he point out consequential flaws, which were brought from the conception of a character, and went through the whole development process, inception of the character and his kit, to the release of the game. Which is why I was so adamant about "why does it matter to know about those fields?", at this point, it's irelevant. The intricacies of the development does not really matter to the final consummer, but then again, I can understand and empathise with you and your stance on the matter. The last point I'll make is that you treat this situation as something that should be respected because you know the work that have been done behind them, while OP and me treat it as a concientious decision that went through all these steps as written above, and yet fall flat once in our hands. For me at least, this isn't about dragging them in the mud rather than my (former) surprise at your reaction to OP's post. Those mecanics are what they are, and ought to be treated accordingly (and, I might add, they DID treat them accordingly), and at some point, the way you dismissed the conversation without trying to understand where OP came from really struck a nerve with me. I apologize for my short temper, I misjuged the way you posted at first, and I rather appreciate that you came with a well formulated answer explaining clearly where you're coming from. I hope I did the same with this answer. [SEP] I apologize for my short temper, I misjuged the way you posted at first, and I rather appreciate that you came with a well formulated answer explaining clearly where you're coming from. I hope I did the same with this answer.
-Posts that criticize the infallibility of the SEC usually get a good share of downvotes on r/cfb and I distinctly remember looking at this subreddit the day after that game expecting a flood of posts of disappointed viewers to match all the hype posts leading up to it but there wasn't much of anything. [SEP] Posts that criticize the infallibility of the SEC usually get a good share of downvotes on r/cfb
-Well if we use your math, 50% to get one that i already have, and i already have 10, how on earth do i get 3 times only one from the 10 i already have? And it happens to be just the same gun others are complaining also: http http I'm not good at math, but what are the percentages now? Unreal :) [SEP] I'm not good at math, but what are the percentages now? Unreal :)
-> Well, in my experience, citing data is how one structures and supports an argument. Is this not how you do things? Of course it is (is the condescension really necessary?) but the Casina citation doesn't really support the argument any more than the Trinummus example earlier, at least, I didn't think it did when I made that post. > Are you stating that there are no instances of AcI without overt esse? No, of course not. I was saying that there are some instances of AcI with the "esse" present, so if "ecce" took an AcI, I would expect that there would be at least one instance of "ecce" and a non-implied infinitive. But you're right about this: > There are only a couple of instances in Plautus, so that's the data we have That makes sense. > The conditional has to be governed by something; there is no overt verb; given the parallel construction, and other syntactic trends I've already mentioned, taking ecce as a de facto verb is the most elegant, most credible solution. Fair enough. You're probably right. > Sic quidem viri; sed ne qui sexus a laude cessaret, ecce et virginum virtus: una ex opsidibus regi datis elapsa custodiam, Cloelia, per patrium flumen equitabat. I recalled another instance of a clause dependent on a phrase with "ecce". Would you say that ecce is functioning as a de facto verb here as well? [SEP] Of course it is (is the condescension really necessary?) but the Casina citation doesn't really support the argument any more than the Trinummus example earlier, at least, I didn't think it did when I made that post.
->>She also didn't mention role playing, bondage, or anal play. >Right. And role playing, bondage, and anal play are not the equivalent of blowjobs. The only equivalence that matters is satisfaction. Some people don't like oral play. Anything the other partner wants is relevant. >>Who are you to say what should be important to her? >Where did I say what should and should not be important to her? Quotes please. "Interesting how blow jobs are an important part of sex but cunnilingus is not. Hmm." >> It is rank sexism to say that she needs to enjoy certain activities b/c she has a vagina. >When did I say that? Quotes please. You implied that cunnilingus should be important to OP solely on the basis of her sex. >>Or to assume that her BF isn't interested in meeting her sexual needs b/c he's a man. >When did I say that? Once again, quote me please. You implied that she should value cunnilingus and that her BF wasn't providing it. >>And I am quite calm, thank you. >Then stop with the childish insults. What childish insults? Quotes please. >>As calm as I can be after reading your blatantly sexist claptrap. >Sexism? I don't see any. Reading comprehension clearly wasn't emphasized at your finishing school, was it honey? [SEP] What childish insults? Quotes please.
-You're only person here so far who's indicated having read my entire post. I'd define Reddit as a discussion forum, which is quite fundamentally different than a social network. All that you can ascertain about a Reddit user are his/her username and some article or pictures he or she likes. You don't know what the person looks like, where they live, who their friends and relatives are, what they do for fun, and so much other personal information that you can find from a social network -- like where people went to school, where they've traveled, who they've dated in the past, and other stalkery things. But Facebook IS a big part of er life. It's not just a passive thing, like (analogously) a guy watching sports on TV all the time. If I were to be connected to her on there, I'd then have all these freakin strangers knowing about me, and surely she will be interested in their reactions. This sounds idiotic, sure, but you can see from other comments on this page that not being a Facebook user is actual a strong enough statement as to merit being called a "hipster," which is a more or less an absolutely anti-modern-technology person. THAT'S how embedded it is in modern life! [SEP] This sounds idiotic, sure, but you can see from other comments on this page that not being a Facebook user is actual a strong enough statement as to merit being called a "hipster," which is a more or less an absolutely anti-modern-technology person. THAT'S how embedded it is in modern life!
-> Canada can't regulate aviation emissions from international carriers. Did you not read my post? I said a lot of our emissions come from flying in the Quebec-Windsor and Calgary-Edmonton corridors. That's where most of our population is. We can certainly reduce that amount by moving a lot of that traffic to rail. Done right, we could even shift some driving over. I'm not even sure we need High Speed Rail. Something like this would be more than sufficient: http Again, the point isn't so much that these will make drastic cut to emissions. What they will do is help us economically, while also cutting emissions. > building codes - not federal jurisdiction. Should have said "work with the provinces". Lost in the edit. > That said, 80% of canada's electricity is hydro, and they don't need storage. Are we sure we won't have a Duck Curve problem when so much of hydro is base load? Also, grid adaptation is not just storage. When every house needs 50 amp service to charge their EV, we're going to have issues with neighbourhood transformers. I'm talking about the "last mile" problem. http > Lots of NGOs and think tanks have done studies on subsidies for EVs. Again. Did you read my post? Or did you just see "Tesla" and jump to talking points about EVs. I specifically talked of electrification of trains and buses. Not EVs. Electric vehicles are a situation that will sort itself out in due course with economics. What we can do is help transit authorities electrify faster. See GO Transit's Electrification project as an example. [SEP] Did you read my post? Or did you just see "Tesla" and jump to talking points about EVs.
->You are a racist. >Do you have any idea how stupid it is to say that people in Cambodia for example are more "priviliged" than you, an American? The richest country in the world. I have no idea where you're getting this from. Are you taking my general claim that Asian people are privileged in regards to education and, ignoring the common sense answer that I'd be talking about the US or UK, assumed I obviously meant Cambodian people are doing great? Lol dude wtf. Great start. >How did OP, the abused orphan, have better access to anything than you? Did ya miss the "tend to" bit? It's literally statistics. Stop being offended by facts. >What are you even talking about? This drivel literally makes no sense. If you get a better education you'll get better grades. Simple - good teachers, resources, etc, leads to better results than shit teachers. If you require the exact same from people with shit educations and people from great educations, you give the latter group an easier ride, which isn't fair. >What are you trying to say? Now you have completely abandoned race and USA and gone to UK and state schools vs. private schools. It doesn't even have anything to do with your country and you don't even know what the article is talking about. That people from less good schools (state schools) with X grades - the entrance requirements to universities - perform better than those at better schools (private schools) with those grades. And I'm from the UK, broski. I think in your rage you're comically misunderstanding me. >If you think all white people in UK go to "private schools", you are sorely mistaken. Oh no, you got me. I didn't realise all white people didn't go to private schools. I thought literally every white person went to private schools, despite me using the words "tend to" and "generally" throughout and being white myself and going to a terrible state school. >In my country, we accept doctors based on their credentials, not their skincolour. Is this the UK? Did you know a lot of universities have contextual entry requirements that account for the quality of your school? Hell, I'm applying for jobs as a solicitor now, and a lot of them use RARE, which compares your grades to the average for your school, rather than setting a strict boundary. We basically do affirmative action on a much more precision scale, my dude. [SEP] We basically do affirmative action on a much more precision scale, my dude.
-Sorry OP but you must not understand the tactics because Ramsey is playing fantastic at what he supposed to do. I know you are a little kid but that is no excuse. Ramsey and Arteta have dictated the game, they have done what they needed. Per fucked up the offside, Monreal didn't track his run, both times the outside defender needed to pressure the ball, either Per or Carl and neither did. You could argue that Ramsey or Arteta needed to be there in support but they are man marking through the middle, that leaves responsibility to Per, Carl, or Walcott on those times and none of them did it, don't blame Ramsey blame the defense. [SEP] Ramsey is playing fantastic at what he supposed to do
-From what I've learned over the last few years, a good chunk of Christian scientists aren't Christian at all. They say they are to please the public to a certain extent, and reap benefits that Atheists can't attain, due to general condescension. But regardless, to solely rely in the one literature that IS the Christian religion, in lieu of a personal explanation, just doesn't sit right with me. [SEP] From what I've learned over the last few years, a good chunk of Christian scientists aren't Christian at all
-That's nice and all (see how douchey that can sound in text format?) but there are organizations out there designed to help people in your situation. If you have 2 years of medical records proving your wife has a condition and the company was notified of her condition with doctor's recommendations then that's called discrimination. Majority of time just a threat of a lawsuit is enough to make a company fold because they don't want the bad press and you can easily find labor rights attorneys who charge a small fee, or sometimes none at all, unless the company reaches a settlement. That all being said it doesn't always work out in the employees favor and yes sometimes the system fails them. I'm sorry it happened to your wife but there are avenues one can take in that situation, the problem is that most people either don't know about or don't spend the time to research for one reason or another. In the end, companies will always get away with doing employees wrong if the employees are unwilling to challenge them. [SEP] That's nice and all (see how douchey that can sound in text format?)
+You work at UPS. Revenue is down because people stopped buying your services as much. UPS is not a charity that prints money from thin air, so they have to let you go. Or the migrant workers start spending money buying stuff. This benefits UPS since they sell stuff the migrant workers buy. Now UPS has enough money to not let you go. [SEP] Let me make this really simple.
+> It's amazing how being hamstrung into using the previous coach's playbook and injuries decimating an already thin roster have affected people's perception of Mel Tucker in one year. I disagree. Tucker went from the Browns to the Jags to the post-Lovie Bears where he shat the bed as guys got hurt. I'm not blaming him for 2013, but there's no doubt in my mind that he isn't going to get that defense back to greatness. Here are his defense's rankings 3 years in Jacksonville: - 2009: 4.1 YPC (11th), 67.6% completion percentage (31st), 27th in passing yards, 96 passer rating (30th), 14 sacks (32nd), 7.0 net adjusted yards per pass attempt (30th), 7.6 YPA (27th) - 2010: 4.7 YPC (28th), 65% completion percentage (28th), 28th in passing yards, 98.5 passer rating (31st), 26 sacks (30th), 7.5 adjusted net yards per pass attempt (32nd), 8.3 YPA (32nd) - 2011: 3.8 YPC (5th), 63.5% completion percentage (29th), 8th in passing yards, 83.7 passer rating (16th), 31 sacks (25th), 5.5 adjusted net yards per pass attempt (25th), 6.9 YPA (13th) And then PPG: - 2009: 23.8 (24th) - 2010: 26.2 (27th) - 2011: 20.6 (11th) Tucker had one average season in Jacksonville (2011), and I would say some of it had to do with the offense sucking (15.2 PPG in 2011, 22.1 in 2010, and 18.1 in 2009) and opponents going conservative sooner. >The reason they couldn't stop the run was a lot of things, like Peppers giving up when Lovie was canned. Like having an OLB playing end in McClellan, a DE playing DT in Wootton, and a practice squad player playing NT in Cohen. Tucker couldn't change any of these things. I'm not arguing that the Bears 2013 defense was Tuckers fault. That shit was a dumpster fire due to injuries. What I am saying is that Tucker has never been involved with a winning NFL team, doesn't know what it looks like, and has never produced a top ten defensive unit. And now he gets to deal with a post-Lovie defense, players like Peppers who respected Lovie but not Tucker, aging veterans who know the old system, young guys who need to get up to speed in the NFL, and FAs, and all of them need to come together under a new scheme. That's a tough job for anyone, and I don't believe Tucker is an above-average DC. [SEP] He was DC for one year with the Browns, and they didn't keep him.
+> I'm okay with allowing the tech community to decide what's worth talking about. If the people like a stunt driver jumping over 16 cars that doesn't mean that it should be upvoted in /r/aww. Upvotes show the interest in a topic, not whether it's even in the right sub. You understand that right? [SEP] Do you understand the concept of rules in a subreddit and pointing to a more suitable sub?
+The stance you're taking on the matter is too much of a technical one, understandable seing your background. However, you can pretty much assume, as long as not proved otherwise that people don't understand/don't care about the technical point and exactitude of the terms they use in a contexte such as this one. The conversation never went from a design perspective to a technical one, because when OP said "play test", he point out consequential flaws, which were brought from the conception of a character, and went through the whole development process, inception of the character and his kit, to the release of the game. Which is why I was so adamant about "why does it matter to know about those fields?", at this point, it's irelevant. The intricacies of the development does not really matter to the final consummer, but then again, I can understand and empathise with you and your stance on the matter. The last point I'll make is that you treat this situation as something that should be respected because you know the work that have been done behind them, while OP and me treat it as a concientious decision that went through all these steps as written above, and yet fall flat once in our hands. For me at least, this isn't about dragging them in the mud rather than my (former) surprise at your reaction to OP's post. Those mecanics are what they are, and ought to be treated accordingly (and, I might add, they DID treat them accordingly), and at some point, the way you dismissed the conversation without trying to understand where OP came from really struck a nerve with me. [SEP] I apologize for my short temper, I misjuged the way you posted at first, and I rather appreciate that you came with a well formulated answer explaining clearly where you're coming from. I hope I did the same with this answer.
+and I distinctly remember looking at this subreddit the day after that game expecting a flood of posts of disappointed viewers to match all the hype posts leading up to it but there wasn't much of anything. [SEP] Posts that criticize the infallibility of the SEC usually get a good share of downvotes on r/cfb
+Well if we use your math, 50% to get one that i already have, and i already have 10, how on earth do i get 3 times only one from the 10 i already have? And it happens to be just the same gun others are complaining also: http http [SEP] I'm not good at math, but what are the percentages now? Unreal :)
+> Well, in my experience, citing data is how one structures and supports an argument. Is this not how you do things? > Are you stating that there are no instances of AcI without overt esse? No, of course not. I was saying that there are some instances of AcI with the "esse" present, so if "ecce" took an AcI, I would expect that there would be at least one instance of "ecce" and a non-implied infinitive. But you're right about this: > There are only a couple of instances in Plautus, so that's the data we have That makes sense. > The conditional has to be governed by something; there is no overt verb; given the parallel construction, and other syntactic trends I've already mentioned, taking ecce as a de facto verb is the most elegant, most credible solution. Fair enough. You're probably right. > Sic quidem viri; sed ne qui sexus a laude cessaret, ecce et virginum virtus: una ex opsidibus regi datis elapsa custodiam, Cloelia, per patrium flumen equitabat. I recalled another instance of a clause dependent on a phrase with "ecce". Would you say that ecce is functioning as a de facto verb here as well? [SEP] Of course it is (is the condescension really necessary?) but the Casina citation doesn't really support the argument any more than the Trinummus example earlier, at least, I didn't think it did when I made that post.
+>>She also didn't mention role playing, bondage, or anal play. >Right. And role playing, bondage, and anal play are not the equivalent of blowjobs. The only equivalence that matters is satisfaction. Some people don't like oral play. Anything the other partner wants is relevant. >>Who are you to say what should be important to her? >Where did I say what should and should not be important to her? Quotes please. "Interesting how blow jobs are an important part of sex but cunnilingus is not. Hmm." >> It is rank sexism to say that she needs to enjoy certain activities b/c she has a vagina. >When did I say that? Quotes please. You implied that cunnilingus should be important to OP solely on the basis of her sex. >>Or to assume that her BF isn't interested in meeting her sexual needs b/c he's a man. >When did I say that? Once again, quote me please. You implied that she should value cunnilingus and that her BF wasn't providing it. >>And I am quite calm, thank you. >Then stop with the childish insults. >>As calm as I can be after reading your blatantly sexist claptrap. >Sexism? I don't see any. Reading comprehension clearly wasn't emphasized at your finishing school, was it honey? [SEP] What childish insults? Quotes please.
+You're only person here so far who's indicated having read my entire post. I'd define Reddit as a discussion forum, which is quite fundamentally different than a social network. All that you can ascertain about a Reddit user are his/her username and some article or pictures he or she likes. You don't know what the person looks like, where they live, who their friends and relatives are, what they do for fun, and so much other personal information that you can find from a social network -- like where people went to school, where they've traveled, who they've dated in the past, and other stalkery things. But Facebook IS a big part of er life. It's not just a passive thing, like (analogously) a guy watching sports on TV all the time. If I were to be connected to her on there, I'd then have all these freakin strangers knowing about me, and surely she will be interested in their reactions. [SEP] This sounds idiotic, sure, but you can see from other comments on this page that not being a Facebook user is actual a strong enough statement as to merit being called a "hipster," which is a more or less an absolutely anti-modern-technology person. THAT'S how embedded it is in modern life!
+> Canada can't regulate aviation emissions from international carriers. Did you not read my post? I said a lot of our emissions come from flying in the Quebec-Windsor and Calgary-Edmonton corridors. That's where most of our population is. We can certainly reduce that amount by moving a lot of that traffic to rail. Done right, we could even shift some driving over. I'm not even sure we need High Speed Rail. Something like this would be more than sufficient: http Again, the point isn't so much that these will make drastic cut to emissions. What they will do is help us economically, while also cutting emissions. > building codes - not federal jurisdiction. Should have said "work with the provinces". Lost in the edit. > That said, 80% of canada's electricity is hydro, and they don't need storage. Are we sure we won't have a Duck Curve problem when so much of hydro is base load? Also, grid adaptation is not just storage. When every house needs 50 amp service to charge their EV, we're going to have issues with neighbourhood transformers. I'm talking about the "last mile" problem. http > Lots of NGOs and think tanks have done studies on subsidies for EVs. Again. I specifically talked of electrification of trains and buses. Not EVs. Electric vehicles are a situation that will sort itself out in due course with economics. What we can do is help transit authorities electrify faster. See GO Transit's Electrification project as an example. [SEP] Did you read my post? Or did you just see "Tesla" and jump to talking points about EVs.
+>You are a racist. >Do you have any idea how stupid it is to say that people in Cambodia for example are more "priviliged" than you, an American? The richest country in the world. I have no idea where you're getting this from. Are you taking my general claim that Asian people are privileged in regards to education and, ignoring the common sense answer that I'd be talking about the US or UK, assumed I obviously meant Cambodian people are doing great? Lol dude wtf. Great start. >How did OP, the abused orphan, have better access to anything than you? Did ya miss the "tend to" bit? It's literally statistics. Stop being offended by facts. >What are you even talking about? This drivel literally makes no sense. If you get a better education you'll get better grades. Simple - good teachers, resources, etc, leads to better results than shit teachers. If you require the exact same from people with shit educations and people from great educations, you give the latter group an easier ride, which isn't fair. >What are you trying to say? Now you have completely abandoned race and USA and gone to UK and state schools vs. private schools. It doesn't even have anything to do with your country and you don't even know what the article is talking about. That people from less good schools (state schools) with X grades - the entrance requirements to universities - perform better than those at better schools (private schools) with those grades. And I'm from the UK, broski. I think in your rage you're comically misunderstanding me. >If you think all white people in UK go to "private schools", you are sorely mistaken. Oh no, you got me. I didn't realise all white people didn't go to private schools. I thought literally every white person went to private schools, despite me using the words "tend to" and "generally" throughout and being white myself and going to a terrible state school. >In my country, we accept doctors based on their credentials, not their skincolour. Is this the UK? Did you know a lot of universities have contextual entry requirements that account for the quality of your school? Hell, I'm applying for jobs as a solicitor now, and a lot of them use RARE, which compares your grades to the average for your school, rather than setting a strict boundary. [SEP] We basically do affirmative action on a much more precision scale, my dude.
+Sorry OP but you must not understand the tactics because . I know you are a little kid but that is no excuse. Ramsey and Arteta have dictated the game, they have done what they needed. Per fucked up the offside, Monreal didn't track his run, both times the outside defender needed to pressure the ball, either Per or Carl and neither did. You could argue that Ramsey or Arteta needed to be there in support but they are man marking through the middle, that leaves responsibility to Per, Carl, or Walcott on those times and none of them did it, don't blame Ramsey blame the defense. [SEP] Ramsey is playing fantastic at what he supposed to do
+. They say they are to please the public to a certain extent, and reap benefits that Atheists can't attain, due to general condescension. But regardless, to solely rely in the one literature that IS the Christian religion, in lieu of a personal explanation, just doesn't sit right with me. [SEP] From what I've learned over the last few years, a good chunk of Christian scientists aren't Christian at all
+but there are organizations out there designed to help people in your situation. If you have 2 years of medical records proving your wife has a condition and the company was notified of her condition with doctor's recommendations then that's called discrimination. Majority of time just a threat of a lawsuit is enough to make a company fold because they don't want the bad press and you can easily find labor rights attorneys who charge a small fee, or sometimes none at all, unless the company reaches a settlement. That all being said it doesn't always work out in the employees favor and yes sometimes the system fails them. I'm sorry it happened to your wife but there are avenues one can take in that situation, the problem is that most people either don't know about or don't spend the time to research for one reason or another. In the end, companies will always get away with doing employees wrong if the employees are unwilling to challenge them. [SEP] That's nice and all (see how douchey that can sound in text format?)
 Many feminists in my group of friends like to talk about it, but maybe that's just us. I do agree that these questions aren't as voiced though. Why? I'm not sure. Could be because feminism is originally coming from female perspectives, because we've lived lives where we've been worth less than men and we're tired of it. So the fight has primarily been to lift women to have the equal worth of a man first. I haven't heard as many men complain about not having the same rights as women when it comes to certain things as much (could be because I haven't taken as much notice, or because I'm female). Often when I've seen/heard men complain, they've often been shut down (which honestly sucks). But also, many times when I see these questions come up, it's not really to voice the concern of men having it worse in some aspects or to bring up issues, but it's really to bring down feminism. So it's spoken about in the wrong context. I think if we want to bring these things up, they can't be brought up in a way to put down something else. Feminists want men and women to be equal. We want men to have the same rights as us, and we want women to have the same rights as men. We need to become better to lift each other up. This was sort of a ramble. But what I want to conclude is that if you want to acknowledge this more, talk about it more. Spread knowledge. Because it is important. But do it in the right context. /r/MensLib is a good subreddit where they bring up these types of questions and issues, without hating on feminism :) [SEP] Many times when I see these questions come up, it's not really to voice the concern of men having it worse in some aspects or to bring up issues, but it's really to bring down feminism.
-Apple tends not to point out when a feature they added existed before. But they also never claim to have invented it. And that's most features. That's a lot of where apple hate comes from. People act like apple thinks they invented everything, when Apple never actually claims that they did. It would just be shitty marketing to be like "and we added this feature we saw on chrome a while ago" [SEP] "and we added this feature we saw on chrome a while ago"
-Jesus dude... first, learning about photosynthesis in elementary school doesn't mean understanding it at an atomic level. Kids understand the general concept of "fire" at a human scale before they are thinking about atoms and chemical reactions. Second, you know Feynman spent a year working in a biology lab... Sure he didn't have his degrees in biology, but he understood it well enough to talk about a basic subject like this. And actually he did make some contributions to the field (studies of intragenic supression)... but the biggest contribution is probably just insight on the differences between scientific fields. Lastly, what does that video you linked have to do with any of this? I guess you're saying that Feynman is ranting here with no real point? If that's the case I feel bad for you, you seem incapable of experiencing many of the simple pleasures in life. [SEP] If that's the case I feel bad for you, you seem incapable of experiencing many of the simple pleasures in life.
-> so we cant trust his recorded statements but we can trust that him being scared made him unable to murder? Even based on the judge's statement that to take the world of people that may be on the influence of drugs with a punch of salt. Cromier was a creepy fuck but it's not enough to convict him. >Victim blaming at its finest. Its not her fault that she was murdered by Raymond because he couldn't keep it in his pants, the disgusting pedophile. I'm not even blaming her. There's no point I was even blaming her. I agree as stated above that cromier was a creepy fuck for screwing around with a 15yo, call him a pedophile all you want but he's not going to jail for her death. >If you want to be mad? Jesus Christ, A 15 year old girl was murdered and you belittle the emotions of a grieving family and people. absolutely sickening. Proves my point that this trial was based on emotion. As I stated before, there was little to no evidence to convict cromier and that's how it'll end. You can be mad and take tantrums but a jury decided he wasn't guilty. [SEP] Proves my point that this trial was based on emotion. As I stated before, there was little to no evidence to convict cromier and that's how it'll end. You can be mad and take tantrums but a jury decided he wasn't guilty.
+Apple tends not to point out when a feature they added existed before. But they also never claim to have invented it. And that's most features. That's a lot of where apple hate comes from. People act like apple thinks they invented everything, when Apple never actually claims that they did. It would just be shitty marketing to be like [SEP] "and we added this feature we saw on chrome a while ago"
+Jesus dude... first, learning about photosynthesis in elementary school doesn't mean understanding it at an atomic level. Kids understand the general concept of "fire" at a human scale before they are thinking about atoms and chemical reactions. Second, you know Feynman spent a year working in a biology lab... Sure he didn't have his degrees in biology, but he understood it well enough to talk about a basic subject like this. And actually he did make some contributions to the field (studies of intragenic supression)... but the biggest contribution is probably just insight on the differences between scientific fields. Lastly, what does that video you linked have to do with any of this? I guess you're saying that Feynman is ranting here with no real point? [SEP] If that's the case I feel bad for you, you seem incapable of experiencing many of the simple pleasures in life.
+> so we cant trust his recorded statements but we can trust that him being scared made him unable to murder? Even based on the judge's statement that to take the world of people that may be on the influence of drugs with a punch of salt. Cromier was a creepy fuck but it's not enough to convict him. >Victim blaming at its finest. Its not her fault that she was murdered by Raymond because he couldn't keep it in his pants, the disgusting pedophile. I'm not even blaming her. There's no point I was even blaming her. I agree as stated above that cromier was a creepy fuck for screwing around with a 15yo, call him a pedophile all you want but he's not going to jail for her death. >If you want to be mad? Jesus Christ, A 15 year old girl was murdered and you belittle the emotions of a grieving family and people. absolutely sickening. [SEP] Proves my point that this trial was based on emotion. As I stated before, there was little to no evidence to convict cromier and that's how it'll end. You can be mad and take tantrums but a jury decided he wasn't guilty.
 > To the uninformed/average user I think this might be you. > using a VPN to connect to the world outside of your country (i.e. China ) that would be me, but not China. The great country of the republic of Korea. I don't use a vpn to play runescape but sometimes my vpn is on when i play runescape. We don't all live in a place where you live. I might live in a country where there is no hulu or netflix and streaming porn is banned. I might have other legitimate reasons but i love how you try to be a know-it-all with your smug attitude of superiority. [SEP] That would be me, but not China. The great country of the republic of Korea
-I already admitted that it was unfair for me to lump you in with pro-lifers simply because you have a conservative stance on welfare. But if we're talking about American politics, there is clearly one party that does tout both stances. And you did say earlier that the irony of this "joke" is lost on liberals, which led me to conclude that you lean conservative. That's a pretty safe assumption but feel free to correct me. I don't see how one could possibly oppose abortion without having a belief in the sacredness of each individual human life. Could you explain that to me? It doesn't seem logical not to have that belief as a prerequisite for being pro-life. Can you please point to a program that provides monetary or material relief to the poor that was proposed by conservatives and not liberals? A single program? Many voters identify as Republicans (despite the fact that Republicans advocate policies that work against their own immediate economic interests) because they actually believe in a coherent set of conservative principles. They actually believe that, in the long run, not having public assistance programs (that would benefit them in the short term) will lead to more growth, which they can hope to benefit from. They believe in "growing the pie" or that "all ships rise with the tide", so to speak. However, there is also a large bloc of conservative evangelical voters who only support Republicans because they refuse to vote for any candidate who is not pro-life, based on their beliefs that a) the right to life begins before birth and b) every human life is sacred. Again, I find it ironic that anyone who believes that every human life is sacred would continue to espouse this idea that humans can be compared to wild animals, or to support a party whose principles reflect such ideas. [SEP] Many voters identify as Republicans (despite the fact that Republicans advocate policies that work against their own immediate economic interests) because they actually believe in a coherent set of conservative principles.
-You're being ridiculous. I think poor people deserve every opportunity to not be poor. That has nothing to do with paying people what the market dictates. I believe all people, no matter how poor, are capable of learning a skill to putting themselves in a position to earn a decent living. Raising the minimum wage because you think poor people have no choice but to flip burgers is a lamentable, and quite frankly a disgusting, insinuation. [SEP] I think poor people deserve every opportunity to not be poor.
-> Even if the court "determined" the Fourth Amendment didn't apply, are they correct in determining this? "The Supreme Court isn't final because they're right. They're right because they're final." The rest of your comment betrays the fact that you're not familiar with the cases which have shaped Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. > Are the digital messages/documents on it not our present-day equivalents of letters, or "papers"? They are, which is why such content is protected by the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. Nevertheless, there are other things related to your cell phone which are not. Please try and keep up. > They are supposed to "interpret the law" as it was intended and I can hazard a guess that had the Fourth Amendment been written today, given its intention was to guarantee us rights to privacy This is extremely debatable. There is some manner of privacy which is protected, but it's absurd to simply say it establishes rights to privacy without caveats. In fact, it specifically carves out exceptions - a reasonableness requirement, only applying to searches/seizures, and still allowing an invasion of privacy upon probable cause and an appropriate warrant! There's absolutely no way that we can handwave our way from, "I think it kinda gives us privacy," straight to, "Literally anything that I think increases our privacy is protected by the Fourth Amendment." That's just not the case. > it would have included digital privacy. It does! But again, this is not unlimited. Your right to privacy in the physical world isn't unlimited, either. For example, the post office can take pictures of the outside of an envelope that you send through the mail. They can do this without a warrant. Law enforcement can obtain that information without a warrant. As easy as it is to imagine, "But maybe I want that to be private," it simply doesn't fall under the warrant requirement. We have a lot of case history here, and I highly suggest you read it. At the very least, start following Orin Kerr's writing. [SEP] We have a lot of case history here, and I highly suggest you read it. At the very least, start following Orin Kerr's writing.
-So now you're actually threatening me? That's cute. I was simply asking why you're angry. Why do you rage against everyone on here? [SEP] I was simply asking why you're angry.
-> You say all of this, link to what appears to be a random video game reviewer and expect that to convince me that my experience with games that have realistic characters and those that don't just...don't real? No, I linked to a reviewer who succinctly summarised the problems with photorealism, which is what is required to conquer the uncanny valley. You're deliberately trying to avoid answering any points whatsoever. > I'll put it this way: whatever negative effect the uncanny valley might have on my gameplay experience It isn't about the negative effect of the uncanny valley so much as the negative effect of the focus on realism et al. Realism is not required to make a connection with a player, and is fully capable of detracting from what is. > it pales in comparison to feeling like a small child and trying not to laugh at graphics from the games you and others are bringing up as paragons of awesome non-realistic games. "Feeling like a small child" mostly stems stems from your own insecurities, not the games' graphics. However, for example, the Mother series is known for having superficially friendly looking graphics but using a mixture of text, audio and thematic shifts to create a sense of disorientation that a child like Ness having an experience as you do in Mother 2/Earthbound, really would have. One of the key events that led to the conception of the series and style was that the creator walked in on a brutal rape scene in a movie theatre as a child. I don't think that experience could ever have been conveyed without the cartoony visuals of the series. > I'm not saying there's anything wrong with liking those games, just that I and most others in the western world generally don't like them as much as we like their realistic counterparts. You can't speak for most of the western world. If that were the case, the highest selling physical game in history would not be Wii Sports. Moreover, you are free to like realistic games. It is categorically false to say that a realistic style is required to create a connection with the player. > ...no, that was not a rebuttal. That was a statement of my experience. So what you said was pointless in the context of this discussion. > Were you expecting that I was going to say "oh, well now that you've said that about some games I haven't played, you're clearly right"? No, because it's not a choice between those two. There is no value to you saying " I haven't played those games and I haven't heard of them but I did play one tangentially related game I didn't like. Now because I haven't heard of them, what does that tell you about how important those games are?" That's a rebuttal, that last part, but a weak one that I argued. > However, my saying that I've never heard of some of these games after playing games for many years does sort of undermine the idea that these are the universally accepted paragons of awesome you seem to think they are. Your ignorance does not undermine anything. Anyone can claim to have not heard of anything. I can find at least several billion people who never heard of The Beatles either. That doesn't undermine the importance or universal acclaim for the Beatles in mainstream music culture. > "Chrono Trigger" appears to be a Japanese game. Maybe Japanese people or fans of Japanese games agree that it's the best game ever, but I speak English and Japanese games have a nasty habit of translating horribly into the English language...as in, they often transform into barely comprehensible nonsense. If you're trying to tell a story, that doesn't help. Chrono Trigger had great localisation and sold a majority of its units in the EU and NA. More importantly, even if it was a Japan centric game, it doesn't matter that you didn't or werent capable of experiencing it because that's completely irrelevant; if it's engaging in Japanese to people who can speak Japanese, that still supports my point. There is nothing English-centric about my argument. > I would also suggest that the Walking Dead's popularity might have had something to do with being a tie-in with a massively popular TV show. That's why they licensed the IP, but A) That is not why it is so popular, considering the other hyped Walking Dead game, Killer Instinct was a game with more realistic graphics, and was even part of the first person horror-survival genre yet ended up as a critical and commercial flop B) the fact that it is so popular is more to demonstrate its relevance; you haven't played it but it's just as relevant as any AAA game. > The people objecting very strongly in this thread to an observation that most people seem to agree with You're not backing up this idea that "most people" agree with it, considering nonrealistic graphics have been just as, if not more, successful than realistic graphics, historically. > are referring me to a few well-known games like FF and WD, and then a long list of obscure games that are supposedly awesome. The fact that you haven't heard of them doesn't make them obscure. The fact that you haven't heard of Chrono Trigger is mind boggling if you've actually been an active participant in the gaming community for a long time. That or you're very young (mid teens probably). > If this same scenario played out in other art forms, we would be calling it either pretentiousness, snobbery or hipsterism. No, it wouldn't. If someone said "more realism = better connection with the audience", there's nothing hipsterish or snobby about disagreeing with that when it's just a completely unsupported point that makes no sense. Realism in itself does nothing for forming a connection between the player and the art in any art form. It is the content of the art that is supposed to do that. For example, a hyperrealist render of an apple probably won't form any connection with the viewer while something that's not realistic at all might. > Books aren't interactive. Books require no choice or active participation. Books are a singular art form, video games are a synthesis of literature, visual art, sound and game mechanics. How does this rebut the fact that books can be engaging and form connection with the player based on only story? Additionally, what about text based adventure games? What about Visual Novel games that have nothing to stand on except their story and usually very stylised art but are still critically acclaimed and beloved? More realism =\= a greater connection between the game and the player. This idea remains unfounded, unsubstantiated and demonstrably untrue, which is what I've been showing all along with examples of games that are fibdly remembered for making a connection with the player, and despite their unrealistic graphics. That core point, which I initially objected to, remains untrue. [SEP] "Feeling like a small child" mostly stems stems from your own insecurities, not the games' graphics.
-I'm voting for Gary Johnson, since I'd like to own the guns without actually needing them to shoot someone. Trump is a fucktard. I don't care if he's a rabid pro-gun fucktard, he is still a fucktard. His policies will be the policies of a fucktard and his reactions will cause my lovely guns to get used by kids I like in wars we don't need because fucktard couldn't keep his mouth shut in front of our allies, enemies, or anyone else. I prefer never, ever to have to use the weapons I train with. Situational awareness and avoidance. And now you can give me my fucking downvotes like this sub always does for going against the bullshit machismo. I only stay for the articles on positive results from CCW these days. [SEP] And now you can give me my fucking downvotes like this sub always does for going against the bullshit machismo.
-Well now that you mention it. We did a few things to reintroduce moderator discretion and don't have everything exactly spelled out in the rules anymore. Allowing us to use our best judgement to remove / allow threads. That probably actually did have quite some impact. My rough plan is to continue that trend throughout all of the rules, shorten them and explain them separately. To have a TLDR for people with common sense and a not so tldr for rule lawyers. Maybe not even explicitly as rule but more along the lines of explaining the intentions behind this rule and why we might act in certain ways in regards to this. But nothing is set in stone in that regard just yet. First we'll get our newbies on board and then I'll start that off... which will probably take another few months before we roll out anything significant. Change is slow. But anyway. Thanks! [SEP] My rough plan is to continue that trend throughout all of the rules, shorten them and explain them separately. To have a TLDR for people with common sense and a not so tldr for rule lawyers. Maybe not even explicitly as rule but more along the lines of explaining the intentions behind this rule and why we might act in certain ways in regards to this.
-A pattern I noticed with these guys looking for deep and intellectual conversations is that the subject usually is one of their own theories that are about as groundbreaking as water is wet. They don't have a specific topic they know inside out and don't really read any form of academic work; they just feel like they are really fucking smart and thereby worth listening to. They then get upset that no one appreciates their intellect when the truth is that everyone interested in ''deep discussions'' don't enjoy talking to them because nothing they say is well-researched or challenging, just tired repetitions that isn't worth arguing about (not that they are open to being questioned and proven wrong). I think that's because they never actually read an academic paper and seen just how specific most discussed topics are. Instead they just read a summary of some great philosopher's work and felt really smart for understanding the main points so they present these great theories about the human condition and the meaning of life while the rest of the people in the room just want to discuss someone's cool thesis about the trainability of bees or discuss the ethics of marketing plastic surgery through influencers. [SEP] form of academic work; they just feel like they are really fucking smart and thereby worth listening to.
-if you live in the U.S I think you're exaggerating in the sense that these are societal problems that individual women can't face/conquer. While all of these do happen and are part of our society. This in no way forces you to be anything you are not, you won't be stoned/killed. You can be a super fat ugly girl that is smart and open to her sexuality and still have a job/ and be happy or whatever. As more and more women be just who they want to be then slowly but surely these social constructs will change. [SEP] While all of these do happen and are part of our society. This in no way forces you to be anything you are not, you won't be stoned/killed.
-I have respect for your point of view, and feel no need to insult you with pejorative terms such as "spookiness." I also don't try to hide the fact that I'm not a physicalist, and won't be unless mind can somehow be explained in terms of the physical. All of the physical processes which we know to occur in the brain--chemistry, electric charges--occur outside the brain too. So if you claim brains are the sole and complete cause of mind, I'd like to know how exactly they cause it, and why you are so sure of this claim. And nobody in your camp has anything to say about this: all we know is that drugs or brain surgery alter mind. Which fits perfectly the Cartesian idea that the soul is attached to the brain. Evidence I know that supports my view includes spooky stuff such as out of body experience, and coincidence (you receive a phonecall from a loved one just when thinking about them, for example.) it's spooky, but the world itself is incredibly mysterious, and only reductionists--people too silly to admit how little they no--mistake mystery for inanity. In the19th century, idealism reigned supreme, just as materialism dominates today. I think that the next thing will be something which combines both, but alas, doubt I'm the one to discover it. However, most mediocre thinkers will always follow accept the popular arguments of the day, whatever they are. [SEP] all we know is that drugs or brain surgery alter mind. Which fits perfectly the Cartesian idea that the soul is attached to the brain.
-The tree didn't learn anything anyway. In most countries, not wasting food is more important than trying to force your moral views on old people. Why do you even care? [SEP] In most countries, not wasting food is more important than trying to force your moral views on old people.
-> So you're questioning what the analysts say after they get concrete data about the situation because their predictions were wrong?... that's uhhh reasonable. I'll be waiting for the evidence to your counterpoints from the professionals you've collected though... Uh no, I'm questioning their conclusions if they are based on wrong information.. especially once that can't be unproven (hence, even more likely to be biased) like Solo bombed because of bad marketing and being to close to TLJ... right... > Except, again, you're comparing marvel to Star Wars. Something that analysts learned from the Solo debacle is that Star Wars is more of an event and needs to be properly marketed, built up and slotted. Except that, no, there is nothing that supports that.. you're just grabbing data and then fitting your own biased narrative around it. There is no reason for this level of under performance. You do realize that the underlying reasoning for it being "too close" to TLJ is because of the bad reception to TLJ right? Badly marketed? That's an euphemism for not generating enough interest.. what can suck the interest out of a film series? Heavily badly received previous installment... Remember during the trailer for TFA when the Millenium Falcon first flew onto the screen? Where I was people stood and cheered.... This time? bleh.. whatever... yeah.. same thing.. completely different effect.. what is the cause of this? Was it TFA? Or was it the last time they saw the Falcon? exactly. It's not Marvel... It's not even DCEU... Even all of those have outgrossed Solo... ohhh.. and BvS and Suicide Squad were released 5 months from each other (oh, they weren't too close?..) and they both trounced Solo.. And SS was also not in the "main" series... kinda like Solo.. hmmmm.. > Ant-Man and the Wasp made 600 mil at the box office after Infinity War made 2 bil. That's 30% of Infinity War's grossing... Yeah, sure.. I'll give you that one.. but Ant Man was never meant to be as big as Solo was.. it slightly under-performed.. Solo outright bombed.. > (including the doubling of its budget during production) When a movie is supposed to make 1b and it makes less than half it's a frikin' bomb.. budget issues are aside from that.. it wouldn't have been considered less of a bomb if it lost less money.. still lost money. > I'm gonna wait for you to provide me with the experts that refute the analysts claims and back whatever your claims even are... because you don't seem to have any points other than "analysts wrong" which, I mean, sure you can discredit the professionals, but that's a pretty lofty goal where you're gonna need evidence... Hate to break it to you, but they have no evidence either.... who pays for their services? Who benefits from this "it was just badly marketed and too close to TLJ" narrative? Is it the fans? Or is it the multi billion dollar company with millions in marketing budget? Why would tracking say that Solo was set to open at 170 million? Why say that it had presold more than BP??? Why? cuz they pick and choose whatever metric they like and they bend it to fit a narrative to serve their purposes... ​ What "evidence" do you have? ​ ​ ​ [SEP] It's not Marvel... It's not even DCEU... Even all of those have outgrossed Solo... ohhh.. and
->whenever anyone defends a religious text or character by appealing to looking at "the whole" or "context", I roll my eyes. Anything and everything has to be taken in context. Even the ridiculous legalism of Leviticus has a purpose and a place, whether you agree with it or not (also do read about the history of the text, it's basically a lengthy priest fight and people sneaking extra stuff in to win arguments. I don't know why that's so funny to me.) > Just like the No True Scotsman fallacy, it's a line that's given a free pass in religion even though outside of religion everyone quickly identifies how erroneous it would be to defend atrocious behaviours through context. The "no true Scotsman" fallacy is just internet armchair philosopher nonsense. A Scotsman is a class defined as "a person who is Scottish". The notion of "no true Scotsman" is just needless analysis of nonsensical attempts to re-define a well established class. The same applies to a religious group. A Jew, a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist, these all have good working definitions that make it pretty easy to figure out who is or is not a member of each group. This is why "context" is actually vital - you can't just take a piece of something and claim that it is enough for full understanding of the thing. Hence the pidgin metaphor. And no one, anywhere, is defending atrocious behavior based on the Bible. Very, very few Christians will say "we should kill babies" because God kills babies in the story of Exodus. In fact, your not even address the story by focusing on the death of the first born sons. That's not what the story is about, at all, and to take that piece out and claim that's central to the Tanakh/Old Testament is simply insane. That would be like reading a paragraph of The Lord of the Rings and just assuming that's what the whole book is about. It also ignores things like metaphor and simile and all the things human beings use to tell stories to make them more interesting. [SEP] Very, very few Christians will say "we should kill babies" because God kills babies in the story of Exodus.
-The way they dealt with it was great. Some movies might also try to lean a bit too far in the opposite direction, where the frumpy middle aged woman turns out to be the greatest hero who ever lived once she discovers her inner beauty/empowerment. She struggles, she has difficulty adjusting to her harrowing situation, she nearly blows it all a few times. She's shown as being desirable but not in a way that is exaggerated to the point of being ham fisted. In the end she grows and develops in a way that, while not realistic (because it's a movie), is at least reasonable and feel believable. In other words, they treat her like a real person and not either a running gag or a mary sue, and the movie ends up being excellent for it. [SEP] where the frumpy middle aged woman turns out to be the greatest hero who ever lived once she discovers her inner beauty/empowerment.
-Your attitude is prejudiced. One day hopefully you'll see that. Being emotionally honest is not manipulation. I was just letting you know the very real repercussions of your actions. You once attacked me because I called you a "gal" with zero malice intended. Hell, you've attacked me over and over again until recently​, so please don't act like I have no reason to see malice in your words after I have specifically had this conversation with you on multiple occasions, yet you continue with your careless attitude and descriptions of my genitalia. [SEP] You once attacked me because I called you a "gal" with zero malice intended.
-So this is an absolutely perfect example of circular logic; if I believe your first sentence, then the rest of your argument falls into place. However, if your root argument is flawed then the whole thing is wrong. I'm not trying to blow you up specifically; however, so, so, so much of today's 'social truisms' are based on shitty/circular logic. It's tragically common. So let's examine your logical root: "all critics draw from life experience". Is this true? Possibly, but almost certainly not in a unique way. 'Knowledge' is gained by studying the corpus of that field \- you become a mathematician by learning math. You become an art critic by studying art. In this case, you'd study movies. To truly make a cogent argument that gender/race deeply matter and are the exclusive domain of a given gender/race/etc combo, you're going to have to make a coherent argument that 'the human experience' either doesn't exist or is irrelevant. That's a huge fucking ask, and if you can't do it, you're argument is critically weakened (yes, it is. and think about it before you reflexively argue back). Put differently, what did Kael bring that was specific to her gender that Bazin or Ebert could not? Or was she just a really well\-studied analyst of the art itself? More broadly, is criticism about the art or an examination of self by proxy of the art (this is a trick question b/c these are two wildly different things). Now where gender/race/etc does matter is in today's neo\-film\-criticism, where you have 27yr old writing 'think pieces' that are not film criticism, but instead are commentary on personal/social issues pretending to be film criticism. If you want an example, look at the NYT review of Oceans 8 where the author dedicated 20% of the review to the movie and 80% of the review to commentary on personal/gender/social issues. And to be clear, the author should feel free to write whatever she wants, but her piece was not a movie review; it was a think piece that mentioned a movie. [SEP] Put differently, what did Kael bring that was specific to her gender that Bazin or Ebert could not?
-> Not satisfied with that, he gives them loathsome agonising diseases too. Ok, since you're looking for answers to observed moral conundrums, let's bypass the evidence component! God did not create the natural world as we see it today; the natural world as described by survival of the fittest is a causal reaction to Jehovah removing his authority from the earth, and allowing Beelzebub to determine "knowledge of good and bad". The natural world is a reflection of the spirit inside of mankind and the deceiver. "It's a ~~doggy~~ dog eat dog world" The original creation was designed as a peaceful symbiotic system, and will be again in the future: ---------------- "On that day I will make a covenant with all the wild animals and the birds of the sky and the animals that scurry along the ground so they will not harm you. I will remove all weapons of war from the land, all swords and bows, so you can live unafraid in peace and safety." - Hosea 2:18 THIS is Jehovah's creation; not the pale shadow reflected by man's heart under the delusion of the opposition. "The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them." - Isaiah 11:6 ------------------- Granted, Jehovah allowed this "age" to transpire: ---------------- "For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope that the creation itself will also be set free from enslavement to corruption" - Romans 8:20-21 I understand your response; I've felt the same way in the past, when I was operating with insufficient data. -------------- Shall we unwind WHY Jehovah should be trusted to allow the creation to go through this process? Or, because your concept of God and the natural world is in error, and the argument is not applicable... how about the evidence? ------------------- On a personal note, what benefit do you gain from becoming an atheist, since the problem remains, but is MORE bleak, since you, the universe, animals and all mankind have quantifiably zero hope other than release from moral frustration by death? E.G. now that you're "thanking Beelzebub" what have you solved? [SEP] Shall we unwind WHY Jehovah should be trusted to allow the creation to go through this process?
-I thought that the info that I had a boyfriend would discourage him, since I believe that the Norwegian translation was just an excuse. Also me explaining that I have a Norwegian boyfriend justified my recent presence in Norway despite not speaking any Norwegian [SEP] me explaining that I have a Norwegian boyfriend justified my recent presence in Norway
-I wouldn't call the history book that most closely matches your views of how the world works, the most "unbiased." And that's something you should have learned a long time ago. Although the Spanish banned slavery to appease the British, they were perfectly okay will letting it continue in Cuba. Cuba wasn't some lawless places. It was one of the most controlled parts of the Spanish Empire. Nothing happened in Cuba without the direct oversight of the Spanish Empire. So almost all of Latin America was on edge but yet they made the US give Cuba up? The Same U.S. that wanted Cuba for "generations?" You're grasping at straws now. The US took Cuba from the Spanish Empire, gave Cuba its independence, and the two countries had a close economic relationship that made Cuba one of the most economically successful countries in Latin America. Reestablishing economic and political ties isn't going to bring James DeWolf back from the grave. [SEP] And that's something you should have learned a long time ago.
-Dude, you're just embarrassing yourself now. If the playing field was level, 9/10 South African motorsport racers would be non-white. In reality, 99/100 motorsport racers are white, hence the need for a dedicated programme to address this inequality. It is not a reflection on black people's ability to compete based on their skin colour, it's a response to real numbers that prove staggering levels of inequality in the sport. "Passively racist against blacks." Do you even hear yourself? [SEP] "Passively racist against blacks."
-Generalizing doesn't make you right though either. Maybe men would feel more "welcome" in feminist spaces by learning what their place is in them - they aren't meant to speak over women, which a lot of the time, they do. That's their egos making them "unwelcome," not women. [SEP] Maybe men would feel more "welcome" in feminist spaces by learning what their place is in them - they aren't meant to speak over women, which a lot of the time, they do. That's their egos making them "unwelcome," not women.
-I also feel like there's pretty much no room for rape victims in sex positive feminism. In groups I've run in, BDSM is a huge, empowering thing. It's incredibly triggering for me and I'm not comfortable with men getting off by beating women. I know that if I said this though, I'd be labeled a "kink shamer." I see feminists pushing this kind of sex on young feminists a lot now, as though it's some progressive thing. I also agree with everything you said. [SEP] I also feel like there's pretty much no room for rape victims in sex positive feminism
-I have no idea what you are trying to argue here. >If picturing me as a meathead with a Tapout tank top makes you feel any better go ahead. Have i done anything close to indicate that those who a) like brawls or b) did not like the fight are "meatheads with a tapout tank top"? Of course not, you are projecting your own snark on me. This was a highly technical and to me not very boring fight, you seem to take offence to my point of view and see snark where little or no snark is. [SEP] This was a highly technical and to me not very boring fight
-People are drowning in healthcare, childcare, and education expenses. I haven't seen a single Republican policy to really address those issues and certainly not one that follows other successful examples around the world. At least the Democrats were pushing for policies like paid sick leave and expanding healthcare to all. I don't understand how anyone looks at Republican policies and sees tangible improvements in their life or for their families. I'd love to hear from a Trump supporter what actual improvements they expect from Trump other than vague "more jobs" or "more money to spend on consumer goods". [SEP] I don't understand how anyone looks at Republican policies and sees tangible improvements in their life or for their families.
-You really have no idea what you are talking about. Windows does work with trying to be Secure, like any OS. Just why would you try to sell that to the typical consumer? You wouldn't - the typical consumer doesn't care how you encrypt data or fixed X number of security vulnerabilities. I am sure you can search online to find out what security features they have implmented if you care about it. Privacy is privacy - ask if you have privacy on any website, you don't. But I am willing to bet your anonymous usage of your PC is more private than what you post on Facebook. Performance is relative more so to your computer, than the OS. The Desktop interface is already acknowledged as "this should seem familiar" and their changes back to how Windows used to be - outside of Metro. Metro itself isn't a bad thing, it just wasn't vary easy to work with on a typical desktop, which caused frustration to users. That has been changed since 8.1 anyways. So you obviously are not as up-to-date as you like to think you are. Cortana is going to be like Google Now or how Siri is. If you think Cortana is bad, don't use your phone's voice commands either. Windows UPGRADES are free if you come from Windows 7 or Windows 8.x. But, if you were to go and switch from a non-Windows 7+, you will have to buy it like any other OS. This is their way of trying to stop supporting old versions and get people to the newer and better stuff. If you think any of your life is not collected already, I have shocking news for you. If you have ever been on the Internet since, well, the past 15 years, everything you do is logged in some way. Either anonymously or not. Do you know how easy it is for a website to actually watch your movements while browsing it? Don't believe me, go look at some analytical software for websites out there. And no, I am not talking about heat maps where people see where you click. There are some out there that will let you "watch" someone's session as they use your website. Is this information valuable? Yes, very much so to development reasons. People are always so scared about their information on the Internet, which is a very valid concern. But EVERYONE online does it, and if you don't, your product will fail. Why? Because you have no, or at least a lack of, knowledge on your users. The latest IE is actually pretty nice and not sure about this "bloated features" thing you are talking about. So I think you are an unacknowledged person who starts babbling and ranting on topics you honestly have little information about. Basically the same type of extremists who starts debates over stupid stuff and feed the rest of the people in this world with misinformation and causes the issues we have today. [SEP] If you think any of your life is not collected already, I have shocking news for you. If you have ever been on the Internet since, well, the past 15 years, everything you do is logged in some way. Either anonymously or not.
-Really? Quote to me where I am being hypocritical. [SEP] Quote to me where I am being hypocritical.
->>You are also hilarious to imply that the potus doesn't have advisors >I made no such implication. Said POTUS was advised by a much smarter group of men (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz) who, as smart as they were, managed to hand Iran the elected government of Iraq on a silver platter. You said that exactly nowhere in this thread of discussion. You just insulted Bush and used his lack intelligence to defend your point. >>Regional destabilization has predictable effects. >No, it has chaotic effects. That, and the Bush executive branch did not aim to destabilize Iraq; it aimed to control it. Lol, how do you think you gain control over a region that is held by a regime? Why do you think so many covert operations aim at destabilization? Just to fuck with people? >>Save your condescension, it doesn't impress me. >It's not supposed to impress you. It's supposed to make it possible for your brain to understand the words I'm writing, but it appears that I have overestimated your brain. Ignorant and a cunt. You're a real winner. [SEP] Ignorant and a cunt. You're a real winner
-Indefinite detention? Are you referring to Guantanamo? If so, you need to do a little reading. Drone strikes? What is ethically wrong with drone strikes? Nothing at all. You're going to vomit up a link to the wedding party strike but that's not an argument against drone strikes. And the trade treaties haven't even been put up for congressional review yet. What annoys me about people in general is that, even though there really are a number of things to criticize about Obama's or any other president's time in office, people invariably have no idea what they're talking about when they talk about how great or how crappy a president is. [SEP] And the trade treaties haven't even been put up for congressional review yet
-Ok, some things: You don't need to sign your posts with your full name. Pero go lang if you want to. You seem to have a very fixed view of /r/philippines. Why, what happened? Let me tell you what I said to a Duterte supporter like you: We are not your enemy. We're fighting the same fight, actually. Here's my convo with them. It's very civil. You're the mod of /r/unbiasedph/. One of the recent posts there is a link to a video entitled "Pres Duterte 1st Achievements Part 3 - Mr Riyoh feat Socmed Warriors". You claim to be unbiased. Would you accept memes critical of Duterte, too? Not outright mocking him, mind. Just viewing his presidency objectively. > kaya 50/50 nalang yung subreddit na yan kasi parang neutral lang ito. so sa mga dutertXXXs dyan na ayaw lang naman sa ganyang content, meron naman akong subreddit na namamanage but due to sleeping issues eh parang idle or parang wala lang so i don't want to link a subreddit para iwas issue :). "eh hanapin nyo kung anong subreddit ko pero bawal witchhunt doon kaya baka magdidisable ako ng some features na para patas ;)" Please, what does "neutral" mean to you? [SEP] You seem to have a very fixed view of /r/philippines. Why, what happened?
-Why are so many people my age idiots? Sitting there, playing a bunch of memes at earrape levels over speakers they're not allowed to use, giving me literal hearing loss, and not stopping when I tell them off. [SEP] not stopping when I tell them off.
-If they are different things then absolutely and it is not hypocrisy to do so. So no, I'm not implying it, I'm flat out stating it. Even if they are exactly the same thing and the suggestion is that the other person is doing that thing to excess when they could very easily do a more reasonable amount of it (which is much more relevant here) then that's absolutely fine. What I can't do is say "this thing which I am doing to the same degree as you is something which you should not do, even though our circumstances are not significantly different". For example, if we were both going to kill and eat a pig and I decide that I'm going to beat my pig to death because the suffering makes it taste better I can't then criticise you for beating your pig to death. If you were going to kill your pig using an instant painless method because you believe that suffering should be minimised then you are absolutely entitled to tell me that what I am doing is wrong. Even if you were going to slaughter it in a less painful way because it is not possible to eliminate suffering completely then you are perfectly entitled to criticise me for my actions and belief that suffering is to be maximised if it improves food. I don't give one single solitary shit about your diet, what it involves or farming statistics. phauna expressed the view that your diet seems to involve a lot of animal protein and that producing this involves greater environmental harm than producing plants. The only acceptable responses would be to either show how your diet does not involve a lot of animal protein compared to a normal diet or to show that farming animals causes no more environmental damage than farming plants (actually, a third option would be to concede the point that producing animal protein is more damaging but that you don't think that this is important). Your actual response was "yeah but other sorts of farming harm the environment too and we both do other things that cause other sorts of harm to other things as well". That isn't the issue. We all depend on the environment and, due to the society we live in we all contribute to things which harm it. Is it really unacceptable to you that someone might hold the view that it is ethically preferable for us to at least attempt to make decisions which will lead to slightly less environmental harm than others? [SEP] phauna expressed the view that your diet seems to involve a lot of animal protein and that producing this involves greater environmental harm than producing plants.
-Dark theme? Be prepared for burn-in. Didn't you know that's why Google made the status bar the same color as the app you're using; for aesthetics, and because their upcoming Nexus 6 has a shitty 2012-gen AMOLED panel that would burn in easily. This is also a reason why Samsung doesn't use on screen buttons. Yes, the display on the Galaxy S6 may have improved, but the potential for burn in will always be there, that's just the downfall of AMOLED tech. Don't expect it to be fixed anytime soon. Yes you might be a proud S6 owner who's a bit in denial that your gorgeous AMOLED display could possibly have a "con" but I'm just presenting facts. This is my opinion, if you don't like it, too bad. The fact you don't like what I have to say doesn't change the fact that your AMOLED display is burning as we speak. [SEP] The fact you don't like what I have to say doesn't change the fact that your AMOLED display is burning as we speak.
-A better gaming experience is to play them in proper order. Your comment tells me what kind of gamer you are and, hey, you do you. In the case of OP, it's irresponsible to tell him to play a third game in a connected series when he has the chance to start things out the right way. [SEP] Your comment tells me what kind of gamer you are and, hey, you do you.
-The point is that the debate over gun violence is more complex and nuanced than getting shot is bad. And to have uneducated people in that debate does no good for the people or the debate. [SEP] And to have uneducated people in that debate does no good for the people or the debate.
+I already admitted that it was unfair for me to lump you in with pro-lifers simply because you have a conservative stance on welfare. But if we're talking about American politics, there is clearly one party that does tout both stances. And you did say earlier that the irony of this "joke" is lost on liberals, which led me to conclude that you lean conservative. That's a pretty safe assumption but feel free to correct me. I don't see how one could possibly oppose abortion without having a belief in the sacredness of each individual human life. Could you explain that to me? It doesn't seem logical not to have that belief as a prerequisite for being pro-life. Can you please point to a program that provides monetary or material relief to the poor that was proposed by conservatives and not liberals? A single program? They actually believe that, in the long run, not having public assistance programs (that would benefit them in the short term) will lead to more growth, which they can hope to benefit from. They believe in "growing the pie" or that "all ships rise with the tide", so to speak. However, there is also a large bloc of conservative evangelical voters who only support Republicans because they refuse to vote for any candidate who is not pro-life, based on their beliefs that a) the right to life begins before birth and b) every human life is sacred. Again, I find it ironic that anyone who believes that every human life is sacred would continue to espouse this idea that humans can be compared to wild animals, or to support a party whose principles reflect such ideas. [SEP] Many voters identify as Republicans (despite the fact that Republicans advocate policies that work against their own immediate economic interests) because they actually believe in a coherent set of conservative principles.
+You're being ridiculous. That has nothing to do with paying people what the market dictates. I believe all people, no matter how poor, are capable of learning a skill to putting themselves in a position to earn a decent living. Raising the minimum wage because you think poor people have no choice but to flip burgers is a lamentable, and quite frankly a disgusting, insinuation. [SEP] I think poor people deserve every opportunity to not be poor.
+> Even if the court "determined" the Fourth Amendment didn't apply, are they correct in determining this? "The Supreme Court isn't final because they're right. They're right because they're final." The rest of your comment betrays the fact that you're not familiar with the cases which have shaped Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. > Are the digital messages/documents on it not our present-day equivalents of letters, or "papers"? They are, which is why such content is protected by the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. Nevertheless, there are other things related to your cell phone which are not. Please try and keep up. > They are supposed to "interpret the law" as it was intended and I can hazard a guess that had the Fourth Amendment been written today, given its intention was to guarantee us rights to privacy This is extremely debatable. There is some manner of privacy which is protected, but it's absurd to simply say it establishes rights to privacy without caveats. In fact, it specifically carves out exceptions - a reasonableness requirement, only applying to searches/seizures, and still allowing an invasion of privacy upon probable cause and an appropriate warrant! There's absolutely no way that we can handwave our way from, "I think it kinda gives us privacy," straight to, "Literally anything that I think increases our privacy is protected by the Fourth Amendment." That's just not the case. > it would have included digital privacy. It does! But again, this is not unlimited. Your right to privacy in the physical world isn't unlimited, either. For example, the post office can take pictures of the outside of an envelope that you send through the mail. They can do this without a warrant. Law enforcement can obtain that information without a warrant. As easy as it is to imagine, "But maybe I want that to be private," it simply doesn't fall under the warrant requirement. [SEP] We have a lot of case history here, and I highly suggest you read it. At the very least, start following Orin Kerr's writing.
+So now you're actually threatening me? That's cute. Why do you rage against everyone on here? [SEP] I was simply asking why you're angry.
+> You say all of this, link to what appears to be a random video game reviewer and expect that to convince me that my experience with games that have realistic characters and those that don't just...don't real? No, I linked to a reviewer who succinctly summarised the problems with photorealism, which is what is required to conquer the uncanny valley. You're deliberately trying to avoid answering any points whatsoever. > I'll put it this way: whatever negative effect the uncanny valley might have on my gameplay experience It isn't about the negative effect of the uncanny valley so much as the negative effect of the focus on realism et al. Realism is not required to make a connection with a player, and is fully capable of detracting from what is. > it pales in comparison to feeling like a small child and trying not to laugh at graphics from the games you and others are bringing up as paragons of awesome non-realistic games. However, for example, the Mother series is known for having superficially friendly looking graphics but using a mixture of text, audio and thematic shifts to create a sense of disorientation that a child like Ness having an experience as you do in Mother 2/Earthbound, really would have. One of the key events that led to the conception of the series and style was that the creator walked in on a brutal rape scene in a movie theatre as a child. I don't think that experience could ever have been conveyed without the cartoony visuals of the series. > I'm not saying there's anything wrong with liking those games, just that I and most others in the western world generally don't like them as much as we like their realistic counterparts. You can't speak for most of the western world. If that were the case, the highest selling physical game in history would not be Wii Sports. Moreover, you are free to like realistic games. It is categorically false to say that a realistic style is required to create a connection with the player. > ...no, that was not a rebuttal. That was a statement of my experience. So what you said was pointless in the context of this discussion. > Were you expecting that I was going to say "oh, well now that you've said that about some games I haven't played, you're clearly right"? No, because it's not a choice between those two. There is no value to you saying " I haven't played those games and I haven't heard of them but I did play one tangentially related game I didn't like. Now because I haven't heard of them, what does that tell you about how important those games are?" That's a rebuttal, that last part, but a weak one that I argued. > However, my saying that I've never heard of some of these games after playing games for many years does sort of undermine the idea that these are the universally accepted paragons of awesome you seem to think they are. Your ignorance does not undermine anything. Anyone can claim to have not heard of anything. I can find at least several billion people who never heard of The Beatles either. That doesn't undermine the importance or universal acclaim for the Beatles in mainstream music culture. > "Chrono Trigger" appears to be a Japanese game. Maybe Japanese people or fans of Japanese games agree that it's the best game ever, but I speak English and Japanese games have a nasty habit of translating horribly into the English language...as in, they often transform into barely comprehensible nonsense. If you're trying to tell a story, that doesn't help. Chrono Trigger had great localisation and sold a majority of its units in the EU and NA. More importantly, even if it was a Japan centric game, it doesn't matter that you didn't or werent capable of experiencing it because that's completely irrelevant; if it's engaging in Japanese to people who can speak Japanese, that still supports my point. There is nothing English-centric about my argument. > I would also suggest that the Walking Dead's popularity might have had something to do with being a tie-in with a massively popular TV show. That's why they licensed the IP, but A) That is not why it is so popular, considering the other hyped Walking Dead game, Killer Instinct was a game with more realistic graphics, and was even part of the first person horror-survival genre yet ended up as a critical and commercial flop B) the fact that it is so popular is more to demonstrate its relevance; you haven't played it but it's just as relevant as any AAA game. > The people objecting very strongly in this thread to an observation that most people seem to agree with You're not backing up this idea that "most people" agree with it, considering nonrealistic graphics have been just as, if not more, successful than realistic graphics, historically. > are referring me to a few well-known games like FF and WD, and then a long list of obscure games that are supposedly awesome. The fact that you haven't heard of them doesn't make them obscure. The fact that you haven't heard of Chrono Trigger is mind boggling if you've actually been an active participant in the gaming community for a long time. That or you're very young (mid teens probably). > If this same scenario played out in other art forms, we would be calling it either pretentiousness, snobbery or hipsterism. No, it wouldn't. If someone said "more realism = better connection with the audience", there's nothing hipsterish or snobby about disagreeing with that when it's just a completely unsupported point that makes no sense. Realism in itself does nothing for forming a connection between the player and the art in any art form. It is the content of the art that is supposed to do that. For example, a hyperrealist render of an apple probably won't form any connection with the viewer while something that's not realistic at all might. > Books aren't interactive. Books require no choice or active participation. Books are a singular art form, video games are a synthesis of literature, visual art, sound and game mechanics. How does this rebut the fact that books can be engaging and form connection with the player based on only story? Additionally, what about text based adventure games? What about Visual Novel games that have nothing to stand on except their story and usually very stylised art but are still critically acclaimed and beloved? More realism =\= a greater connection between the game and the player. This idea remains unfounded, unsubstantiated and demonstrably untrue, which is what I've been showing all along with examples of games that are fibdly remembered for making a connection with the player, and despite their unrealistic graphics. That core point, which I initially objected to, remains untrue. [SEP] "Feeling like a small child" mostly stems stems from your own insecurities, not the games' graphics.
+I'm voting for Gary Johnson, since I'd like to own the guns without actually needing them to shoot someone. Trump is a fucktard. I don't care if he's a rabid pro-gun fucktard, he is still a fucktard. His policies will be the policies of a fucktard and his reactions will cause my lovely guns to get used by kids I like in wars we don't need because fucktard couldn't keep his mouth shut in front of our allies, enemies, or anyone else. I prefer never, ever to have to use the weapons I train with. Situational awareness and avoidance. I only stay for the articles on positive results from CCW these days. [SEP] And now you can give me my fucking downvotes like this sub always does for going against the bullshit machismo.
+Well now that you mention it. We did a few things to reintroduce moderator discretion and don't have everything exactly spelled out in the rules anymore. Allowing us to use our best judgement to remove / allow threads. That probably actually did have quite some impact. But nothing is set in stone in that regard just yet. First we'll get our newbies on board and then I'll start that off... which will probably take another few months before we roll out anything significant. Change is slow. But anyway. Thanks! [SEP] My rough plan is to continue that trend throughout all of the rules, shorten them and explain them separately. To have a TLDR for people with common sense and a not so tldr for rule lawyers. Maybe not even explicitly as rule but more along the lines of explaining the intentions behind this rule and why we might act in certain ways in regards to this.
+A pattern I noticed with these guys looking for deep and intellectual conversations is that the subject usually is one of their own theories that are about as groundbreaking as water is wet. They don't have a specific topic they know inside out and don't really read any They then get upset that no one appreciates their intellect when the truth is that everyone interested in ''deep discussions'' don't enjoy talking to them because nothing they say is well-researched or challenging, just tired repetitions that isn't worth arguing about (not that they are open to being questioned and proven wrong). I think that's because they never actually read an academic paper and seen just how specific most discussed topics are. Instead they just read a summary of some great philosopher's work and felt really smart for understanding the main points so they present these great theories about the human condition and the meaning of life while the rest of the people in the room just want to discuss someone's cool thesis about the trainability of bees or discuss the ethics of marketing plastic surgery through influencers. [SEP] form of academic work; they just feel like they are really fucking smart and thereby worth listening to.
+if you live in the U.S I think you're exaggerating in the sense that these are societal problems that individual women can't face/conquer. You can be a super fat ugly girl that is smart and open to her sexuality and still have a job/ and be happy or whatever. As more and more women be just who they want to be then slowly but surely these social constructs will change. [SEP] While all of these do happen and are part of our society. This in no way forces you to be anything you are not, you won't be stoned/killed.
+I have respect for your point of view, and feel no need to insult you with pejorative terms such as "spookiness." I also don't try to hide the fact that I'm not a physicalist, and won't be unless mind can somehow be explained in terms of the physical. All of the physical processes which we know to occur in the brain--chemistry, electric charges--occur outside the brain too. So if you claim brains are the sole and complete cause of mind, I'd like to know how exactly they cause it, and why you are so sure of this claim. And nobody in your camp has anything to say about this: Evidence I know that supports my view includes spooky stuff such as out of body experience, and coincidence (you receive a phonecall from a loved one just when thinking about them, for example.) it's spooky, but the world itself is incredibly mysterious, and only reductionists--people too silly to admit how little they no--mistake mystery for inanity. In the19th century, idealism reigned supreme, just as materialism dominates today. I think that the next thing will be something which combines both, but alas, doubt I'm the one to discover it. However, most mediocre thinkers will always follow accept the popular arguments of the day, whatever they are. [SEP] all we know is that drugs or brain surgery alter mind. Which fits perfectly the Cartesian idea that the soul is attached to the brain.
+The tree didn't learn anything anyway. Why do you even care? [SEP] In most countries, not wasting food is more important than trying to force your moral views on old people.
+> So you're questioning what the analysts say after they get concrete data about the situation because their predictions were wrong?... that's uhhh reasonable. I'll be waiting for the evidence to your counterpoints from the professionals you've collected though... Uh no, I'm questioning their conclusions if they are based on wrong information.. especially once that can't be unproven (hence, even more likely to be biased) like Solo bombed because of bad marketing and being to close to TLJ... right... > Except, again, you're comparing marvel to Star Wars. Something that analysts learned from the Solo debacle is that Star Wars is more of an event and needs to be properly marketed, built up and slotted. Except that, no, there is nothing that supports that.. you're just grabbing data and then fitting your own biased narrative around it. There is no reason for this level of under performance. You do realize that the underlying reasoning for it being "too close" to TLJ is because of the bad reception to TLJ right? Badly marketed? That's an euphemism for not generating enough interest.. what can suck the interest out of a film series? Heavily badly received previous installment... Remember during the trailer for TFA when the Millenium Falcon first flew onto the screen? Where I was people stood and cheered.... This time? bleh.. whatever... yeah.. same thing.. completely different effect.. what is the cause of this? Was it TFA? Or was it the last time they saw the Falcon? exactly. BvS and Suicide Squad were released 5 months from each other (oh, they weren't too close?..) and they both trounced Solo.. And SS was also not in the "main" series... kinda like Solo.. hmmmm.. > Ant-Man and the Wasp made 600 mil at the box office after Infinity War made 2 bil. That's 30% of Infinity War's grossing... Yeah, sure.. I'll give you that one.. but Ant Man was never meant to be as big as Solo was.. it slightly under-performed.. Solo outright bombed.. > (including the doubling of its budget during production) When a movie is supposed to make 1b and it makes less than half it's a frikin' bomb.. budget issues are aside from that.. it wouldn't have been considered less of a bomb if it lost less money.. still lost money. > I'm gonna wait for you to provide me with the experts that refute the analysts claims and back whatever your claims even are... because you don't seem to have any points other than "analysts wrong" which, I mean, sure you can discredit the professionals, but that's a pretty lofty goal where you're gonna need evidence... Hate to break it to you, but they have no evidence either.... who pays for their services? Who benefits from this "it was just badly marketed and too close to TLJ" narrative? Is it the fans? Or is it the multi billion dollar company with millions in marketing budget? Why would tracking say that Solo was set to open at 170 million? Why say that it had presold more than BP??? Why? cuz they pick and choose whatever metric they like and they bend it to fit a narrative to serve their purposes... ​ What "evidence" do you have? ​ ​ ​ [SEP] It's not Marvel... It's not even DCEU... Even all of those have outgrossed Solo... ohhh.. and
+>whenever anyone defends a religious text or character by appealing to looking at "the whole" or "context", I roll my eyes. Anything and everything has to be taken in context. Even the ridiculous legalism of Leviticus has a purpose and a place, whether you agree with it or not (also do read about the history of the text, it's basically a lengthy priest fight and people sneaking extra stuff in to win arguments. I don't know why that's so funny to me.) > Just like the No True Scotsman fallacy, it's a line that's given a free pass in religion even though outside of religion everyone quickly identifies how erroneous it would be to defend atrocious behaviours through context. The "no true Scotsman" fallacy is just internet armchair philosopher nonsense. A Scotsman is a class defined as "a person who is Scottish". The notion of "no true Scotsman" is just needless analysis of nonsensical attempts to re-define a well established class. The same applies to a religious group. A Jew, a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist, these all have good working definitions that make it pretty easy to figure out who is or is not a member of each group. This is why "context" is actually vital - you can't just take a piece of something and claim that it is enough for full understanding of the thing. Hence the pidgin metaphor. And no one, anywhere, is defending atrocious behavior based on the Bible. In fact, your not even address the story by focusing on the death of the first born sons. That's not what the story is about, at all, and to take that piece out and claim that's central to the Tanakh/Old Testament is simply insane. That would be like reading a paragraph of The Lord of the Rings and just assuming that's what the whole book is about. It also ignores things like metaphor and simile and all the things human beings use to tell stories to make them more interesting. [SEP] Very, very few Christians will say "we should kill babies" because God kills babies in the story of Exodus.
+The way they dealt with it was great. Some movies might also try to lean a bit too far in the opposite direction, She struggles, she has difficulty adjusting to her harrowing situation, she nearly blows it all a few times. She's shown as being desirable but not in a way that is exaggerated to the point of being ham fisted. In the end she grows and develops in a way that, while not realistic (because it's a movie), is at least reasonable and feel believable. In other words, they treat her like a real person and not either a running gag or a mary sue, and the movie ends up being excellent for it. [SEP] where the frumpy middle aged woman turns out to be the greatest hero who ever lived once she discovers her inner beauty/empowerment.
+Your attitude is prejudiced. One day hopefully you'll see that. Being emotionally honest is not manipulation. I was just letting you know the very real repercussions of your actions. Hell, you've attacked me over and over again until recently​, so please don't act like I have no reason to see malice in your words after I have specifically had this conversation with you on multiple occasions, yet you continue with your careless attitude and descriptions of my genitalia. [SEP] You once attacked me because I called you a "gal" with zero malice intended.
+So this is an absolutely perfect example of circular logic; if I believe your first sentence, then the rest of your argument falls into place. However, if your root argument is flawed then the whole thing is wrong. I'm not trying to blow you up specifically; however, so, so, so much of today's 'social truisms' are based on shitty/circular logic. It's tragically common. So let's examine your logical root: "all critics draw from life experience". Is this true? Possibly, but almost certainly not in a unique way. 'Knowledge' is gained by studying the corpus of that field \- you become a mathematician by learning math. You become an art critic by studying art. In this case, you'd study movies. To truly make a cogent argument that gender/race deeply matter and are the exclusive domain of a given gender/race/etc combo, you're going to have to make a coherent argument that 'the human experience' either doesn't exist or is irrelevant. That's a huge fucking ask, and if you can't do it, you're argument is critically weakened (yes, it is. and think about it before you reflexively argue back). Or was she just a really well\-studied analyst of the art itself? More broadly, is criticism about the art or an examination of self by proxy of the art (this is a trick question b/c these are two wildly different things). Now where gender/race/etc does matter is in today's neo\-film\-criticism, where you have 27yr old writing 'think pieces' that are not film criticism, but instead are commentary on personal/social issues pretending to be film criticism. If you want an example, look at the NYT review of Oceans 8 where the author dedicated 20% of the review to the movie and 80% of the review to commentary on personal/gender/social issues. And to be clear, the author should feel free to write whatever she wants, but her piece was not a movie review; it was a think piece that mentioned a movie. [SEP] Put differently, what did Kael bring that was specific to her gender that Bazin or Ebert could not?
+> Not satisfied with that, he gives them loathsome agonising diseases too. Ok, since you're looking for answers to observed moral conundrums, let's bypass the evidence component! God did not create the natural world as we see it today; the natural world as described by survival of the fittest is a causal reaction to Jehovah removing his authority from the earth, and allowing Beelzebub to determine "knowledge of good and bad". The natural world is a reflection of the spirit inside of mankind and the deceiver. "It's a ~~doggy~~ dog eat dog world" The original creation was designed as a peaceful symbiotic system, and will be again in the future: ---------------- "On that day I will make a covenant with all the wild animals and the birds of the sky and the animals that scurry along the ground so they will not harm you. I will remove all weapons of war from the land, all swords and bows, so you can live unafraid in peace and safety." - Hosea 2:18 THIS is Jehovah's creation; not the pale shadow reflected by man's heart under the delusion of the opposition. "The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them." - Isaiah 11:6 ------------------- Granted, Jehovah allowed this "age" to transpire: ---------------- "For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope that the creation itself will also be set free from enslavement to corruption" - Romans 8:20-21 I understand your response; I've felt the same way in the past, when I was operating with insufficient data. -------------- Or, because your concept of God and the natural world is in error, and the argument is not applicable... how about the evidence? ------------------- On a personal note, what benefit do you gain from becoming an atheist, since the problem remains, but is MORE bleak, since you, the universe, animals and all mankind have quantifiably zero hope other than release from moral frustration by death? E.G. now that you're "thanking Beelzebub" what have you solved? [SEP] Shall we unwind WHY Jehovah should be trusted to allow the creation to go through this process?
+I thought that the info that I had a boyfriend would discourage him, since I believe that the Norwegian translation was just an excuse. Also despite not speaking any Norwegian [SEP] me explaining that I have a Norwegian boyfriend justified my recent presence in Norway
+I wouldn't call the history book that most closely matches your views of how the world works, the most "unbiased." Although the Spanish banned slavery to appease the British, they were perfectly okay will letting it continue in Cuba. Cuba wasn't some lawless places. It was one of the most controlled parts of the Spanish Empire. Nothing happened in Cuba without the direct oversight of the Spanish Empire. So almost all of Latin America was on edge but yet they made the US give Cuba up? The Same U.S. that wanted Cuba for "generations?" You're grasping at straws now. The US took Cuba from the Spanish Empire, gave Cuba its independence, and the two countries had a close economic relationship that made Cuba one of the most economically successful countries in Latin America. Reestablishing economic and political ties isn't going to bring James DeWolf back from the grave. [SEP] And that's something you should have learned a long time ago.
+Dude, you're just embarrassing yourself now. If the playing field was level, 9/10 South African motorsport racers would be non-white. In reality, 99/100 motorsport racers are white, hence the need for a dedicated programme to address this inequality. It is not a reflection on black people's ability to compete based on their skin colour, it's a response to real numbers that prove staggering levels of inequality in the sport. Do you even hear yourself? [SEP] "Passively racist against blacks."
+Generalizing doesn't make you right though either. [SEP] Maybe men would feel more "welcome" in feminist spaces by learning what their place is in them - they aren't meant to speak over women, which a lot of the time, they do. That's their egos making them "unwelcome," not women.
+. In groups I've run in, BDSM is a huge, empowering thing. It's incredibly triggering for me and I'm not comfortable with men getting off by beating women. I know that if I said this though, I'd be labeled a "kink shamer." I see feminists pushing this kind of sex on young feminists a lot now, as though it's some progressive thing. I also agree with everything you said. [SEP] I also feel like there's pretty much no room for rape victims in sex positive feminism
+I have no idea what you are trying to argue here. >If picturing me as a meathead with a Tapout tank top makes you feel any better go ahead. Have i done anything close to indicate that those who a) like brawls or b) did not like the fight are "meatheads with a tapout tank top"? Of course not, you are projecting your own snark on me. , you seem to take offence to my point of view and see snark where little or no snark is. [SEP] This was a highly technical and to me not very boring fight
+People are drowning in healthcare, childcare, and education expenses. I haven't seen a single Republican policy to really address those issues and certainly not one that follows other successful examples around the world. At least the Democrats were pushing for policies like paid sick leave and expanding healthcare to all. I'd love to hear from a Trump supporter what actual improvements they expect from Trump other than vague "more jobs" or "more money to spend on consumer goods". [SEP] I don't understand how anyone looks at Republican policies and sees tangible improvements in their life or for their families.
+You really have no idea what you are talking about. Windows does work with trying to be Secure, like any OS. Just why would you try to sell that to the typical consumer? You wouldn't - the typical consumer doesn't care how you encrypt data or fixed X number of security vulnerabilities. I am sure you can search online to find out what security features they have implmented if you care about it. Privacy is privacy - ask if you have privacy on any website, you don't. But I am willing to bet your anonymous usage of your PC is more private than what you post on Facebook. Performance is relative more so to your computer, than the OS. The Desktop interface is already acknowledged as "this should seem familiar" and their changes back to how Windows used to be - outside of Metro. Metro itself isn't a bad thing, it just wasn't vary easy to work with on a typical desktop, which caused frustration to users. That has been changed since 8.1 anyways. So you obviously are not as up-to-date as you like to think you are. Cortana is going to be like Google Now or how Siri is. If you think Cortana is bad, don't use your phone's voice commands either. Windows UPGRADES are free if you come from Windows 7 or Windows 8.x. But, if you were to go and switch from a non-Windows 7+, you will have to buy it like any other OS. This is their way of trying to stop supporting old versions and get people to the newer and better stuff. Do you know how easy it is for a website to actually watch your movements while browsing it? Don't believe me, go look at some analytical software for websites out there. And no, I am not talking about heat maps where people see where you click. There are some out there that will let you "watch" someone's session as they use your website. Is this information valuable? Yes, very much so to development reasons. People are always so scared about their information on the Internet, which is a very valid concern. But EVERYONE online does it, and if you don't, your product will fail. Why? Because you have no, or at least a lack of, knowledge on your users. The latest IE is actually pretty nice and not sure about this "bloated features" thing you are talking about. So I think you are an unacknowledged person who starts babbling and ranting on topics you honestly have little information about. Basically the same type of extremists who starts debates over stupid stuff and feed the rest of the people in this world with misinformation and causes the issues we have today. [SEP] If you think any of your life is not collected already, I have shocking news for you. If you have ever been on the Internet since, well, the past 15 years, everything you do is logged in some way. Either anonymously or not.
+Really? [SEP] Quote to me where I am being hypocritical.
+>>You are also hilarious to imply that the potus doesn't have advisors >I made no such implication. Said POTUS was advised by a much smarter group of men (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz) who, as smart as they were, managed to hand Iran the elected government of Iraq on a silver platter. You said that exactly nowhere in this thread of discussion. You just insulted Bush and used his lack intelligence to defend your point. >>Regional destabilization has predictable effects. >No, it has chaotic effects. That, and the Bush executive branch did not aim to destabilize Iraq; it aimed to control it. Lol, how do you think you gain control over a region that is held by a regime? Why do you think so many covert operations aim at destabilization? Just to fuck with people? >>Save your condescension, it doesn't impress me. >It's not supposed to impress you. It's supposed to make it possible for your brain to understand the words I'm writing, but it appears that I have overestimated your brain. . [SEP] Ignorant and a cunt. You're a real winner
+Indefinite detention? Are you referring to Guantanamo? If so, you need to do a little reading. Drone strikes? What is ethically wrong with drone strikes? Nothing at all. You're going to vomit up a link to the wedding party strike but that's not an argument against drone strikes. . What annoys me about people in general is that, even though there really are a number of things to criticize about Obama's or any other president's time in office, people invariably have no idea what they're talking about when they talk about how great or how crappy a president is. [SEP] And the trade treaties haven't even been put up for congressional review yet
+Ok, some things: You don't need to sign your posts with your full name. Pero go lang if you want to. Let me tell you what I said to a Duterte supporter like you: We are not your enemy. We're fighting the same fight, actually. Here's my convo with them. It's very civil. You're the mod of /r/unbiasedph/. One of the recent posts there is a link to a video entitled "Pres Duterte 1st Achievements Part 3 - Mr Riyoh feat Socmed Warriors". You claim to be unbiased. Would you accept memes critical of Duterte, too? Not outright mocking him, mind. Just viewing his presidency objectively. > kaya 50/50 nalang yung subreddit na yan kasi parang neutral lang ito. so sa mga dutertXXXs dyan na ayaw lang naman sa ganyang content, meron naman akong subreddit na namamanage but due to sleeping issues eh parang idle or parang wala lang so i don't want to link a subreddit para iwas issue :). "eh hanapin nyo kung anong subreddit ko pero bawal witchhunt doon kaya baka magdidisable ako ng some features na para patas ;)" Please, what does "neutral" mean to you? [SEP] You seem to have a very fixed view of /r/philippines. Why, what happened?
+Why are so many people my age idiots? Sitting there, playing a bunch of memes at earrape levels over speakers they're not allowed to use, giving me literal hearing loss, and [SEP] not stopping when I tell them off.
+If they are different things then absolutely and it is not hypocrisy to do so. So no, I'm not implying it, I'm flat out stating it. Even if they are exactly the same thing and the suggestion is that the other person is doing that thing to excess when they could very easily do a more reasonable amount of it (which is much more relevant here) then that's absolutely fine. What I can't do is say "this thing which I am doing to the same degree as you is something which you should not do, even though our circumstances are not significantly different". For example, if we were both going to kill and eat a pig and I decide that I'm going to beat my pig to death because the suffering makes it taste better I can't then criticise you for beating your pig to death. If you were going to kill your pig using an instant painless method because you believe that suffering should be minimised then you are absolutely entitled to tell me that what I am doing is wrong. Even if you were going to slaughter it in a less painful way because it is not possible to eliminate suffering completely then you are perfectly entitled to criticise me for my actions and belief that suffering is to be maximised if it improves food. I don't give one single solitary shit about your diet, what it involves or farming statistics. The only acceptable responses would be to either show how your diet does not involve a lot of animal protein compared to a normal diet or to show that farming animals causes no more environmental damage than farming plants (actually, a third option would be to concede the point that producing animal protein is more damaging but that you don't think that this is important). Your actual response was "yeah but other sorts of farming harm the environment too and we both do other things that cause other sorts of harm to other things as well". That isn't the issue. We all depend on the environment and, due to the society we live in we all contribute to things which harm it. Is it really unacceptable to you that someone might hold the view that it is ethically preferable for us to at least attempt to make decisions which will lead to slightly less environmental harm than others? [SEP] phauna expressed the view that your diet seems to involve a lot of animal protein and that producing this involves greater environmental harm than producing plants.
+Dark theme? Be prepared for burn-in. Didn't you know that's why Google made the status bar the same color as the app you're using; for aesthetics, and because their upcoming Nexus 6 has a shitty 2012-gen AMOLED panel that would burn in easily. This is also a reason why Samsung doesn't use on screen buttons. Yes, the display on the Galaxy S6 may have improved, but the potential for burn in will always be there, that's just the downfall of AMOLED tech. Don't expect it to be fixed anytime soon. Yes you might be a proud S6 owner who's a bit in denial that your gorgeous AMOLED display could possibly have a "con" but I'm just presenting facts. This is my opinion, if you don't like it, too bad. [SEP] The fact you don't like what I have to say doesn't change the fact that your AMOLED display is burning as we speak.
+A better gaming experience is to play them in proper order. In the case of OP, it's irresponsible to tell him to play a third game in a connected series when he has the chance to start things out the right way. [SEP] Your comment tells me what kind of gamer you are and, hey, you do you.
+The point is that the debate over gun violence is more complex and nuanced than getting shot is bad. [SEP] And to have uneducated people in that debate does no good for the people or the debate.
 God ... where to start ... If 2000 years ago isn't history enough for you then allright. The earth belongs to Africans , since they settled everywhere first. [SEP] If 2000 years ago isn't history enough for you then allright. The earth belongs to Africans , since they settled everywhere first.
-Griefing is when your crew does something like dropping loot, blowing up your own ship, dropping the anchor repeatedly, etc. Playing the game as intended is never griefing. Plenty of carebear games for you to play kiddo. This one obviously isn't for you. Your mommy didn't teach you to have a thick skin it seems. [SEP] Plenty of carebear games for you to play kiddo.
-Thanks. I expected to get downvoted. there are a BUNCH of TLJ defenders here. I dunno, everyone has an opinion... It just sucks that I have to defend my view point againts people who wouldn't understand the difference between shiny and shallow, and intelligent writing full of lore and depth. [SEP] people who wouldn't understand the difference between shiny and shallow, and intelligent writing full of lore and depth.
-I'd walk around, I saw a few HELP WANTED signs on Pacific when I was there last week. Also, walk around and talk to people, especially in businesses or fields you're interested in. What do you like? Carpentry? Surfboards? Jewelry? Food/restaurants? Just kind of "happen by" and hang around a bit, get talking with people. I know it's shocking but there's actually a real world out there and it's best accessed by stepping away from the monitor and venturing out into the "big blue room". Computer resumes' are just about worthless because you can't even use one to wrap old gum in. [SEP] I know it's shocking but there's actually a real world out there and it's best accessed by stepping away from the monitor and venturing out into the "big blue room". Computer resumes' are just about worthless because you can't even use one to wrap old gum in.
-I'm pretty disappointed to say the least. Buford said he would not overpay Splitter and that is exactly what he went and did. I love Splitter but he is not worth 9mil a year. We finally had options and money to spend and we overpay Splitter. Once we sign Manu our free agency is over unless they decide to ammensty Bonner to let us sign some old vet for the minimum. We are a team that needed to added pieces, not stay the same. We we were very fortunate this year to get where we did and none of it was because of Splitter. We won't win a championship with a overpaid soft center. [SEP] We we were very fortunate this year to get where we did and none of it was because of Splitter.
-Peeping. lol I think that what you find clear is funny. The toxic attitude in this sub needs someone to help mitigate it's damage. The way people are trying to change and engineer new social behavior is disgusting. When women act like that no one bats an eyelash. When men do it everyone comes out to hate on them. It is pretty easy to see the double standard. What you consider harassment is toxic. You have a problem. You need some help. [SEP] When women act like that no one bats an eyelash.
-Sorry to hear that, man... sounds like she's in a better place tho... [SEP] sounds like she's in a better place tho...
-I'll disagree. I played it in like 2005 or 2006 and I wasn't impressed. The story just had nothing for me. Everyone got super hype over Gordon Freeman but his character was boring as fuck. 100% of his character is built by surrounding characters and I would argue it wasn't even done that well. I found the story to be rather "meh", I actually really enjoyed the music, and the general mechanics weren't awe-inspiring to me (especially when you compare Halo 2 releasing only a few days prior). [SEP] Everyone got super hype over Gordon Freeman but his character was boring as fuck.
->Except that no it doesn't because the science of flight takes Earth's gravitational pull into account. You're really sounding foolish here. Let's move you to Mars. Earth's gravitational pull won't stop you there, but you still won't be able to fly. Or let's put you into geostationary orbit - and you'll be able to fly in the Earth's gravitational pull, with no external influence. The cause is you being unable to reach sufficient speed to overcome gravitation, not gravitation itself. >If this is your basis for ignoring scientific fact then you might as well swallow large amounts of arsenic just to make sure the models are accurate. Please, learn the difference between fact and theory. Adverse effects of arsenic are verifiable, have a clear mechanism with no unknown variables and have thousands and thousands of study cases in support of them - so they are a fact. Climate models can't be proven (as we can't conduct an experiment at that scale, real life data is contaminated and driven by Black Swan events, and models are contaminated by real life data as they are constantly tweaked to fit it more), have innumerable unknown parameters (we can't input data on every leaf and insect) and are incredibly complex, so that no computer ever can even run the simulations without oversimplifying things. So saying that any of their predictions are going to come true is a theory, not a fact. And blindly accepting any poorly made theory just because of its authors/supporters is not science, it is religion. Go preach in the nearest mosque if you want to do that. [SEP] And blindly accepting any poorly made theory just because of its authors/supporters is not science, it is religion. Go preach in the nearest mosque if you want to do that.
->Another factor for all these upvotes is the fact that most redditors are socially awkward, so when someone actually pays some attention to them, redditors get happy. You lost me here. Your cynicism has warped your sense of reality. There's just as much good in the world and in people as there is bad, and I think the good is winning out here. People who take this view annoy me, because they seem to think that because they see all the ways things could go wrong or have sinister motivations, they've seen the truth of the situation and everyone else is a moron. I went through a phase like this as a teenager: I started discovering all the bad, nasty things about the world, and thought I was realizing The Truth and that all the good things didn't exist. Then I got older and realized things aren't so black and white, and that you can choose which aspect you focus on. Life is much better this way. If you've found actual evidence that this is some multinational corporation lying to us about its product, by all means blow the whistle. If you feel the urge to caution people not to be blindly trusting, try do it in a way that's not insulting, or even better, just let people learn on their own. But if you just have a negative view of the world and other people's ability to navigate it, please just keep those thoughts to yourself. [SEP] If you've found actual evidence that this is some multinational corporation lying to us about its product, by all means blow the whistle
+Griefing is when your crew does something like dropping loot, blowing up your own ship, dropping the anchor repeatedly, etc. Playing the game as intended is never griefing. This one obviously isn't for you. Your mommy didn't teach you to have a thick skin it seems. [SEP] Plenty of carebear games for you to play kiddo.
+Thanks. I expected to get downvoted. there are a BUNCH of TLJ defenders here. I dunno, everyone has an opinion... It just sucks that I have to defend my view point againts [SEP] people who wouldn't understand the difference between shiny and shallow, and intelligent writing full of lore and depth.
+I'd walk around, I saw a few HELP WANTED signs on Pacific when I was there last week. Also, walk around and talk to people, especially in businesses or fields you're interested in. What do you like? Carpentry? Surfboards? Jewelry? Food/restaurants? Just kind of "happen by" and hang around a bit, get talking with people. [SEP] I know it's shocking but there's actually a real world out there and it's best accessed by stepping away from the monitor and venturing out into the "big blue room". Computer resumes' are just about worthless because you can't even use one to wrap old gum in.
+I'm pretty disappointed to say the least. Buford said he would not overpay Splitter and that is exactly what he went and did. I love Splitter but he is not worth 9mil a year. We finally had options and money to spend and we overpay Splitter. Once we sign Manu our free agency is over unless they decide to ammensty Bonner to let us sign some old vet for the minimum. We are a team that needed to added pieces, not stay the same. We won't win a championship with a overpaid soft center. [SEP] We we were very fortunate this year to get where we did and none of it was because of Splitter.
+Peeping. lol I think that what you find clear is funny. The toxic attitude in this sub needs someone to help mitigate it's damage. The way people are trying to change and engineer new social behavior is disgusting. When men do it everyone comes out to hate on them. It is pretty easy to see the double standard. What you consider harassment is toxic. You have a problem. You need some help. [SEP] When women act like that no one bats an eyelash.
+Sorry to hear that, man... [SEP] sounds like she's in a better place tho...
+I'll disagree. I played it in like 2005 or 2006 and I wasn't impressed. The story just had nothing for me. 100% of his character is built by surrounding characters and I would argue it wasn't even done that well. I found the story to be rather "meh", I actually really enjoyed the music, and the general mechanics weren't awe-inspiring to me (especially when you compare Halo 2 releasing only a few days prior). [SEP] Everyone got super hype over Gordon Freeman but his character was boring as fuck.
+>Except that no it doesn't because the science of flight takes Earth's gravitational pull into account. You're really sounding foolish here. Let's move you to Mars. Earth's gravitational pull won't stop you there, but you still won't be able to fly. Or let's put you into geostationary orbit - and you'll be able to fly in the Earth's gravitational pull, with no external influence. The cause is you being unable to reach sufficient speed to overcome gravitation, not gravitation itself. >If this is your basis for ignoring scientific fact then you might as well swallow large amounts of arsenic just to make sure the models are accurate. Please, learn the difference between fact and theory. Adverse effects of arsenic are verifiable, have a clear mechanism with no unknown variables and have thousands and thousands of study cases in support of them - so they are a fact. Climate models can't be proven (as we can't conduct an experiment at that scale, real life data is contaminated and driven by Black Swan events, and models are contaminated by real life data as they are constantly tweaked to fit it more), have innumerable unknown parameters (we can't input data on every leaf and insect) and are incredibly complex, so that no computer ever can even run the simulations without oversimplifying things. So saying that any of their predictions are going to come true is a theory, not a fact. [SEP] And blindly accepting any poorly made theory just because of its authors/supporters is not science, it is religion. Go preach in the nearest mosque if you want to do that.
+>Another factor for all these upvotes is the fact that most redditors are socially awkward, so when someone actually pays some attention to them, redditors get happy. You lost me here. Your cynicism has warped your sense of reality. There's just as much good in the world and in people as there is bad, and I think the good is winning out here. People who take this view annoy me, because they seem to think that because they see all the ways things could go wrong or have sinister motivations, they've seen the truth of the situation and everyone else is a moron. I went through a phase like this as a teenager: I started discovering all the bad, nasty things about the world, and thought I was realizing The Truth and that all the good things didn't exist. Then I got older and realized things aren't so black and white, and that you can choose which aspect you focus on. Life is much better this way. . If you feel the urge to caution people not to be blindly trusting, try do it in a way that's not insulting, or even better, just let people learn on their own. But if you just have a negative view of the world and other people's ability to navigate it, please just keep those thoughts to yourself. [SEP] If you've found actual evidence that this is some multinational corporation lying to us about its product, by all means blow the whistle
 Let me get this straight -- he was rude and listed another number that is frequently published / slightly higher. I get that he should have respected her expertise, but it seemed he was just trying to show knowledge about the subject and agree ("I've read its even 22") that its a BIG PROBLEM. There are 8,000 service members killing themselves in peace time. We should be glad both candidates have plans to intervene. This article is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Trump wasn't "wrong" so much as he was impolite. [SEP] Trump wasn't "wrong" so much as he was perhaps impolite.
->Long hours =/= working hard. I do 60hrs a week, the vast majority of it sat on my arse piloting a lorry Yes because doctors sit on there arse all day. The amount of ignorance in this statement is hilarious. Working hard would be doing one of the most academically challenging jobs out there at a fast pace between making critical decisions. Just because driving a lorry doesn't take a lot of brains doesn't mean being a doctor is the same. It isn't. I won't waste more time on people who will never be qualified enough to be a doctor but think they somehow know the pace doctors work at and how it isn't hard work. If it were a reasonable statement I'd discuss it but its getting too stupid to bother with unfortunately. [SEP] I won't waste more time on people who will never be qualified enough to be a doctor but think they somehow know the pace doctors work at and how it isn't hard work.
-Blacks not supporting my candidate of choice? They must not be listening, it couldn't possibly be that they simply disagree!! You guys are like a caricature of a Bernie bro. [SEP] Blacks not supporting my candidate of choice? They must not be listening
->The Cowboys are going to have a very one dimensional game this year. Wrong. We will still be a team who controls the game with the run. >Murray is all about plowing through defenders and fighting for extra yards. Wrong. Murray is not afraid of contact but he falls forwards. Lynch is a running back who plows through contact. Murray does not compare. >Randle's playing style is a lot more like Shady. He will try and dance around for those extra yards, and is a fast guy. Wrong. Randle is a patient one cut runner. He is fast and has more burst than Murray when getting through the hole. He does not dance around like Shady. That is an awful comparison. >Having Maxwell on Dez, Thurmond on Beasley, and Carroll on Williams with Jenkins over top can cover the receiving corps decently. Not great, but decently. No one is going to be able to single cover Dez so Jenkins will have to shade to his side. Thurmond will not be able to keep up with Beasley in the slot. No one did last season and no one has during practices, joint practices, or during the preseason. Williams is showing he can be a #1 receiver while Bryant has been on the sidelines. >To beat Dallas' offense, a basic 4-3 defense, or similar, will do. Wrong. We beat Seattle in Seattle. They have the best "basic" 4-3 defense in the NFL. >With the DLine we have, we really only need decent coverage (which we didn't come close to last year). The coverage will need to be more than decent to compete with our offensive line and our receivers. >In the passing game, Dallas has Dez, Beasley, Williams, and, of course, Witten. Of that corps, you can put Dez in single coverage with a safety playing high or double him up. You are finally right about something, covering Dez with a safety help is correct. >Beasley runs lots of crossing routes, which is why the majority of his yards come after the catch (420 yards in 2014; 250 were YAC). You can have him in man with a linebacker helping if need be. He's almost never the first read for Romo, so defenses don't need to put huge pressure on him. Wrong. Beasley does not run a lot of crossing routes. He runs option routes which are usually in-outs, comebacks, or slants depending on the coverage. He does get a lot of yards after catch because he usually beats the initial coverage easily. On first and second down you are correct but on third down Beasley is usually Romo's first read. >By a quick glance of their offense, you don't think the regress much. By actually digging deep into what made their offense successful, they will have to gameplan differently this year than last year by a lot. A lot of the information you have provided is wrong. Our offense will not regress. We will continue to be a team who runs the ball to control the game. > Defensively, they lost their best CB. That is true but you neglect to mention we drafted Byron Jones and signed Corey White. Dallas likes Tyler Patmon and we get a healthy Morris Claiborne back. We lose a great player but we also have depth at the position. >And none of this takes into account of Tony Romo's Iron Man suit fails him this year. His back is going to fall apart one of these days. If he goes down this year, they have 2 rookies and Weeden. Weeden can't even lead a horse to the water. Most teams will not succeed if their star quarterback goes down. [SEP] You are finally right about something, covering Dez with a safety help is correct.
-She didn't fuck him. He was fucking her. I'm not the one who claimed she was screaming at herself to get out of there, that was her. I looked up her sexual history, and that's how I found out she was a rape survivor. All it did, was provide perspective on the rest. > she found it funny She's a comedienne. It's her job. You should hear the jokes other comedians have made about the shit that happens to them. Do you need links? [SEP] She's a comedienne. It's her job. You should hear the jokes other comedians have made about the shit that happens to them. Do you need links?
-My misguided friend, in all your writings you have failed to observe the definition of objective truth. A proposition is generally considered objectively true, to have objective truth, when its truth conditions are met without biases caused by feelings, ideas, opinions, etc., of a sentient subject. This is science. The purpose of the hypotheses, the tests, the scientific method itself is to strip out the filters of feelings, goals, and opinions of the individual that color our world various shades of colors. The ultimate goal of science is a pure understanding of how the universe. I say again science is not a individual pursuit nor is it a set of knowledge in one given time period. It is a journey all of humanity is walking together. Every generation building upon its predecessors. A relentless search for the objective truth of how the universe functions. [SEP] My misguided friend, in all your writings you have failed to observe the definition of objective truth.
-It's not a strawman at all. You, and every other feminist who decries "manspreading" take umbrage with the realities of male anatomy. If you didn't, manspreading wouldn't exist outside of Tumblr. Yet here we are. > the initial surge of manspreading pictures And there it is. "The initial surge". Third wavers found something to complain about, then it became this feminist cause celebre and big news in places. I'm told time and time again that my understanding of feminism is flawed, which I find quite puzzling. My understanding of modern feminist is informed by feminists. If you don't like the fact that I associate feminists with trivial complaints like "manspreading", then I urge you to foster more level-headedness in the third wave feminist movement. Quite frankly, I don't owe you the kindness of ignoring your crazies. If feminism is willing to make widespread condemnations based on minor irritants (and it is) I am willing to disregard feminism in return. Feminists seem to labor under the belief that they're free to slander and insult people at will, while simultaneously insulating the most radical amongst them from any sort of criticism. Smells an awful lot like an expectation of privilege to me. [SEP] the realities of male anatomy.
+>Long hours =/= working hard. I do 60hrs a week, the vast majority of it sat on my arse piloting a lorry Yes because doctors sit on there arse all day. The amount of ignorance in this statement is hilarious. Working hard would be doing one of the most academically challenging jobs out there at a fast pace between making critical decisions. Just because driving a lorry doesn't take a lot of brains doesn't mean being a doctor is the same. It isn't. If it were a reasonable statement I'd discuss it but its getting too stupid to bother with unfortunately. [SEP] I won't waste more time on people who will never be qualified enough to be a doctor but think they somehow know the pace doctors work at and how it isn't hard work.
+, it couldn't possibly be that they simply disagree!! You guys are like a caricature of a Bernie bro. [SEP] Blacks not supporting my candidate of choice? They must not be listening
+>The Cowboys are going to have a very one dimensional game this year. Wrong. We will still be a team who controls the game with the run. >Murray is all about plowing through defenders and fighting for extra yards. Wrong. Murray is not afraid of contact but he falls forwards. Lynch is a running back who plows through contact. Murray does not compare. >Randle's playing style is a lot more like Shady. He will try and dance around for those extra yards, and is a fast guy. Wrong. Randle is a patient one cut runner. He is fast and has more burst than Murray when getting through the hole. He does not dance around like Shady. That is an awful comparison. >Having Maxwell on Dez, Thurmond on Beasley, and Carroll on Williams with Jenkins over top can cover the receiving corps decently. Not great, but decently. No one is going to be able to single cover Dez so Jenkins will have to shade to his side. Thurmond will not be able to keep up with Beasley in the slot. No one did last season and no one has during practices, joint practices, or during the preseason. Williams is showing he can be a #1 receiver while Bryant has been on the sidelines. >To beat Dallas' offense, a basic 4-3 defense, or similar, will do. Wrong. We beat Seattle in Seattle. They have the best "basic" 4-3 defense in the NFL. >With the DLine we have, we really only need decent coverage (which we didn't come close to last year). The coverage will need to be more than decent to compete with our offensive line and our receivers. >In the passing game, Dallas has Dez, Beasley, Williams, and, of course, Witten. Of that corps, you can put Dez in single coverage with a safety playing high or double him up. >Beasley runs lots of crossing routes, which is why the majority of his yards come after the catch (420 yards in 2014; 250 were YAC). You can have him in man with a linebacker helping if need be. He's almost never the first read for Romo, so defenses don't need to put huge pressure on him. Wrong. Beasley does not run a lot of crossing routes. He runs option routes which are usually in-outs, comebacks, or slants depending on the coverage. He does get a lot of yards after catch because he usually beats the initial coverage easily. On first and second down you are correct but on third down Beasley is usually Romo's first read. >By a quick glance of their offense, you don't think the regress much. By actually digging deep into what made their offense successful, they will have to gameplan differently this year than last year by a lot. A lot of the information you have provided is wrong. Our offense will not regress. We will continue to be a team who runs the ball to control the game. > Defensively, they lost their best CB. That is true but you neglect to mention we drafted Byron Jones and signed Corey White. Dallas likes Tyler Patmon and we get a healthy Morris Claiborne back. We lose a great player but we also have depth at the position. >And none of this takes into account of Tony Romo's Iron Man suit fails him this year. His back is going to fall apart one of these days. If he goes down this year, they have 2 rookies and Weeden. Weeden can't even lead a horse to the water. Most teams will not succeed if their star quarterback goes down. [SEP] You are finally right about something, covering Dez with a safety help is correct.
+She didn't fuck him. He was fucking her. I'm not the one who claimed she was screaming at herself to get out of there, that was her. I looked up her sexual history, and that's how I found out she was a rape survivor. All it did, was provide perspective on the rest. > she found it funny [SEP] She's a comedienne. It's her job. You should hear the jokes other comedians have made about the shit that happens to them. Do you need links?
+A proposition is generally considered objectively true, to have objective truth, when its truth conditions are met without biases caused by feelings, ideas, opinions, etc., of a sentient subject. This is science. The purpose of the hypotheses, the tests, the scientific method itself is to strip out the filters of feelings, goals, and opinions of the individual that color our world various shades of colors. The ultimate goal of science is a pure understanding of how the universe. I say again science is not a individual pursuit nor is it a set of knowledge in one given time period. It is a journey all of humanity is walking together. Every generation building upon its predecessors. A relentless search for the objective truth of how the universe functions. [SEP] My misguided friend, in all your writings you have failed to observe the definition of objective truth.
+It's not a strawman at all. You, and every other feminist who decries "manspreading" take umbrage with If you didn't, manspreading wouldn't exist outside of Tumblr. Yet here we are. > the initial surge of manspreading pictures And there it is. "The initial surge". Third wavers found something to complain about, then it became this feminist cause celebre and big news in places. I'm told time and time again that my understanding of feminism is flawed, which I find quite puzzling. My understanding of modern feminist is informed by feminists. If you don't like the fact that I associate feminists with trivial complaints like "manspreading", then I urge you to foster more level-headedness in the third wave feminist movement. Quite frankly, I don't owe you the kindness of ignoring your crazies. If feminism is willing to make widespread condemnations based on minor irritants (and it is) I am willing to disregard feminism in return. Feminists seem to labor under the belief that they're free to slander and insult people at will, while simultaneously insulating the most radical amongst them from any sort of criticism. Smells an awful lot like an expectation of privilege to me. [SEP] the realities of male anatomy.
 Wasn't the same argument made simply because it's about this time the top level at Arsenal predicted that Arsenal will be financially secure? Are we not? And what do you do when you are in a good position? Make yourself better. This doesn't happen in a season. How it's looked over is silly to me. We're doing better than recent seasons, desipte 3 horrific games. Don't be blind to the bigger picture. [SEP] We're doing better than recent seasons, despite 3 horrific games. Don't be blind to the bigger picture.
-The only two that could be possibly considered name calling weren't in this sub. What happens in other subs with completely different rules has no relevance here. You didn't find one case of me calling you or your candidate names. I understand that you may find it offensive that your candidate received more than $30 million from Goldman Sachs, but pointing that out isn't name calling. [SEP] You didn't find one case of me calling you or your candidate names.
->Where's the racist comments? Read the linked article. And then maybe also read about all the racist shit that Trump has supported and understand that there's a link. >downvoting is an attempt at silencing something you disagree with Or, and I really want you to think about this, it's other people using their freedom of expression to disagree with you. AKA democracy. Fascism would be punishing you in some significant way for your dissenting opinion. You're going to have an uphill battle convincing me that the loss of imaginary internet points is significant. And the fact that you didn't respond to the baby elephant gif makes me think you're probably irredeemable, but just in case not here's an elephant taking good care of a turtle: http [SEP] Or, and I really want you to think about this, it's other people using their freedom of expression to disagree with you. AKA democracy. Fascism would be punishing you in some significant way for your dissenting opinion. You're going to have an uphill battle convincing me that the loss of imaginary internet points is significant.
+The only two that could be possibly considered name calling weren't in this sub. What happens in other subs with completely different rules has no relevance here. I understand that you may find it offensive that your candidate received more than $30 million from Goldman Sachs, but pointing that out isn't name calling. [SEP] You didn't find one case of me calling you or your candidate names.
+>Where's the racist comments? Read the linked article. And then maybe also read about all the racist shit that Trump has supported and understand that there's a link. >downvoting is an attempt at silencing something you disagree with And the fact that you didn't respond to the baby elephant gif makes me think you're probably irredeemable, but just in case not here's an elephant taking good care of a turtle: http [SEP] Or, and I really want you to think about this, it's other people using their freedom of expression to disagree with you. AKA democracy. Fascism would be punishing you in some significant way for your dissenting opinion. You're going to have an uphill battle convincing me that the loss of imaginary internet points is significant.
 If there is one thing 2016 has taught us, it's that when smart and sane people don't pay attention or vote, the idiots and assholes take over. I know politics is frustrating and often tedius, but man I hope people make an effort to get involved in 2018 and beyond, because the worst people we know vote every damn time! [SEP] If there is one thing 2016 has taught us, it's that when smart and sane people don't pay attention or vote, the idiots and assholes take over. I know politics is frustrating and often tedius, but man I hope people make an effort to get involved in 2018 and beyond, because the worst people we know vote every damn time!
 >>Here's a fun fact for you >There's really no need to be smarmy at all. Seriously. I think you might've been reading into the tone on that one. Whenever I come across stats that I find interesting and that go against the common perception people have, I post them as and call them fun facts because I find it very interesting when the numbers go counter to what people expect. Seeing numbers like that are fun to me. > but how likely is that with Vrana, Bura, and Eller all better suited for that spot You don't seem to understand what each role on the PP has been. Thinking Vrana/Bura/Eller would ever play the slot on the PP is very incorrect. This spot on the PP has never been occupied by a small skill player - that is the spot below the endline that Johansson played for a long time (that Kuzy played this year). Vrana/Bura would play the below endline role. Eller plays the half wall where Backstrom does. Here are the players who've been PP Slot players consistently since we implemented the 1-3-1: Brouwer, Ward, Oshie, Connolly - strong right-handed guys who can screen the goalie and muscle their way for rebounds and to create space for the quick one timer when teams decide to mark Ovi. Wilson fits this description to a T. Vrana, Bura, and Eller (all lefties) do not. >You know, i like and try to use analytics as much and P/60 is a useful stat, but the difference between Wilson and all those guys you listed is they converted that into actual points. You don't seem to understand what P/60 is. P/60 is "actual points" just adjusted for how much the player is actually on the ice. It measure the number of points a player records per 60 minutes of ice time (in this case it's per 60 minutes of 5v5 ice time). Let me actually break it down for you so you can see it more clearly: Player|5v5 TOI|5v5 points|5v5 P/60 -|-|-|- Little|1047|26|1.49 Hornqvist|923|21|1.37 Thornton|637|14|1.32 Zibanejad|931|21|1.35 Hoffman|1163|28|1.44 E. Kane|1184|35|1.77 Pavelski|1191|35|1.76 D. Sedin|982|28|1.71 H. Sedin|947|27|1.71 Toews|1021|28|1.64 Johansen|1066|30|1.69 Seguin|1217|34|1.68 Crosby|1260|35|1.67 Wilson|1079|32|1.78 Wilson is 5th on that list in terms of "actual" total 5v5 points. Crosby played 180 more minutes, Seguin played 150 more, Kane and Pavelski played 110 more minutes (and were only barely behind in rate, but were behind) Saying "they converted that into actual points" shows a fundamental misunderstanding for what the numbers are showing. > And it's not as if he was buried on the bottom 6 all year, the majority of his minutes were with a combo of either OV and Kuz or OV and Backstrom How many 5v5 points do you think those guys got? Ovi had 48, Kuz had 44 and Backy had 38. That's not that much more than Wilson's 32 especially considering they got (who was 4th on the whole team behind them at 5v5 points and P/60 - ahead of guys like Vrana and Eller and Oshie and Bura). People are going to need to get comfortable with seeing 5-6M AAVs because they're going to become what 3-4M had been the last couple years. The Cap is going to continue to rise. By 4M a year? probably not, but it's going to keep going up >the largest increase I can recall recently at least Only in the last 4 years. From 13-14 to 14-15 it went up nearly 5M and in the time in between it went up more than 2M in 3 of the 4 years. >That's not even to mention the upcoming FAs we have coming up after this season, Vrana, Bura and Djoos, who yes are RFAs but will be looking at raises (and if they progress the way we hope, significant ones) Both Vrana and Djoos are RFAs coming off ELCs - Those guys only get massive deals if they put up Kucherov-level numbers (Kucherov on ELC numbers, I mean - 60+ points, 30 goals), Vrana'll get in the neighborhood of 3-4M given the team control and Arb option (I'd bet on arbitration, honestly). Bura is likely gone clearing up another 3M - he hasn't progressed and with Vrana's emergence, he doesn't have much of a role. Between Stephenson, Boyd, and Walker one of them will likely be moved up next year (or late this year if Bura gets moved at the deadline, which I could see happening) >I wouldn't have bothered replying, i just woke up here, but damn you pissed me off coming at me like that. Here's a fun fact for you...like I'm some fuckin Pens fan invading the sub calling him a dirty goon or something. I love Wilson and I want him to be the monster we all hope he can be. We're on the same team here. Not like I trashed him or you or even anyone's opinion. I merely gave mine and dispassionately might I add, which I based on logic that you may disagree with, but there was no fuckin need for that, at all. That's a lot of piss and vinegar for one phrase. That "fun fact" is meant to give optimism when relating to Wilson. Everything else I said was just breaking down numbers and pointing out that "hey, we can't look at Wilson just on raw points, we need to look at the context." [SEP] You don't seem to understand what P/60 is
->Steven claims to have been away from the Hoenn league and Mr Pokémon has the orbs from the games in HGSS. This means that RSE happens at least before Gen 4 and therefore before Gen 2, albeit not necesarilly at the same time as Gen 1. It's implied that there are multiple orbs considering the variety of NPCs that provide the orbs across multiple dimensions/timelines/realities. >The first reply in the reddit thread you linked literally states what I'm saying. Check how it says " DPPt/HGSS" and "Megaverse Sinnoh/Jhoto". You said "Megaverse" theory is the theory that everything got rebooted in gen 6". It was just revealed that the games past generation 6 exist on a separate timeline where history unfolded differently than the previous gens. >From the bulbagarden link: "B2W2 and XY happened at the same time, albeit in different universes" Um duh. The Megaverse/Mega Timeline theory is that every game stays within the same chronological order, with the only difference being the existence of mega evolution. The timeline split at the 3000 year old war. Mega timeline: War took place [3000 years] Kanto/Hoenn [3 years] Johto/Sinnoh [unspecified time] Unova [2 years] Unova/Kalos [2 years] Alola. Megas exist. Non Mega timeline: War did not take place [300 years] Kanto/Hoenn [3 years] Johto/Sinnoh etc. etc. etc. Megas do not exist. Zinnia's claims support this. There's a reality where the war didn't take place and megas do not exist. That's the non-mega timeline. >The youtube video also states that Gen 6 is from a timeline(another mistake, as Zinnia refers to "worlds", not timelines) apart from previous games. And here's where you reveal your lack of understanding. I see why you're confused and misinformed now. You're getting caught up on the word "timeline" itself. In the English language, when discussing multiple parallel universes/realities/dimensions/worlds, the word timeline is often synonymous the the previous three words. To jump from one reality to a parallel reality is the same as crossing from one timeline to another. To jump from one world to a parallel world is describing the same thing. This is a fundamental tenet of 'multiverse theory,' generally speaking. For every possible outcome, multiverse theory states there's a split in a timeline/reality where time progresses following the outcome of one decision/choice/event, and another where time progresses following the outcome of the other decision/choice/event. Let's make this easier for you to comprehend. Say on my afternoon jog I come to a fork in the road. Let's say I chose to take the right fork. I finish my jog around 5 pm, come home, and am now replying to a very confused user on reddit. In a alternate reality (remember our synonyms here: timeline, world, universe, dimension) I had chosen to take the left fork in the road. In that reality, time still progresses, yet different outcomes occur due to my decisions. In this alternate dimension, as I'm finishing my jog around 5 pm, a bus swerves to miss a stray animal and crosses my path, killing me. This timeline of events runs parallel and alternate to the one that I am experiencing right now. The English dialogue in the games tends to favor the words 'dimension' and 'world' to keep it kid friendly. However, I see that even this simplification managed to confuse you, my friend. Hoopa is stated to pull entire islands (mirage islands) from different dimensions Burnet studies the dimensional research lab Zinnia refers to an alternate world where megas don't exist In SM and USUM, when changing between day/night it refers to it as the other world That last one is yet another prime example. Sun and Moon are two different realities where time progresses in (near) parallel despite events unfolding differently. In one world Nebby evolves into Lunala and in the other Nebby evolves into Solgaleo. Two timelines, two realities, to universes, nice and simple. >>Minor sidenote, I've only met one other user on this sub who is incapable of understanding basic multiverse theory so I'll page them to read this explanation. Though, they sort of get a pass because english is not their native language. Paging /u/DrasilReborn~ >people keep talking about "timelines" despite time travel not being involved Oh bless your heart. >Also, the only thing you had so far was a lazy asset reuse on a post-game facility. Two separate instances lazy reuse. The sloppiness is one thing, the recurrence just takes it to a whole new level of sloppy. You don't disagree it's lazy. Still doesn't excuse the fact that this laziness is cause for confusion. Let's not brush off the messy and conflicting regional origins of megas. No, your headcanons of isolationist societies are not substantiated. >What we have is enough. Since there's still debate, obviously not. > Those two only happened because they were closely related to a previous game, but that's not how this franchise works in general. I'll give you that considering the standalone nature of each game. But a single line of text from an NPC wouldn't hurt. Hell, Red's presence wasn't even alluded to until very late in the game. > However there IS info given that is ignored. More info wont really help matters because this fanbase doesn't actually care You say this, yet here we are, on a pokemon fan forum, replying to one of the nigh weekly discussions on the timeline. >And yet, some people can get it. Which is good. BUt not nearly enough to warrant a broad consensus. >I do because they're the ones to blame, as seen, proven and not disproven. Even you, who claim to have the timeline down so well, are still labile to picking and choosing which bits of information to give weight to. You and I agree on quite a bit concerning the general structure, but it's the small details that we've been arguing about these past few days. The devil is in the details, bud. [SEP] For every possible outcome, multiverse theory states there's a split in a timeline/reality where time progresses following the outcome of one decision/choice/event, and another where time progresses following the outcome of the other decision/choice/event.
-Part 3: So I came here, to have a discussion about linguistics. What is linguistics? http "Linguistics is the scientific study of human language." Scientific study of human language. What is scientific study? Well you can feel free to disagree with me if I am wrong, but I believe that it involves the scientific method, which is a process of creating a hypothesis.. performing experiments, looking for patterns, and thus coming to conclusions. I think we all know what scientific study really is. What is language? "Language may refer either to the specifically human capacity for acquiring and using complex systems of communication, or to a specific instance of such a system of complex communication. The scientific study of language in any of its senses is called linguistics." This is already stupidly complex, language is communication. It can involve speaking, signaling, and I would say even just understanding, it is simply communicating. What I have been doing from the start here in my series, is attempting to have a conversation about linguistics. I asked a question in my first post referenced, "What is linguistics?" While I agree it may have been slightly distracting to post "(feel free to answer me!) afterwards, the fact of the matter is, I posted a question: "What is linguistics?" And rather than anyone willing to actually explain to me what linguistics is, as we might do in actual human interactions, I got a total of three responses asking me what the question was. My question was, "What is linguistics?" What can we observe from this? My idea: We are not willing to bond with just one person in an anonymous public environment on the internet. I suspect this is because we are scared of risking our other bonds. I even attempted to get to know you people, anyone reading this. I gave you my background. I may not have gone to graduate school for linguistics or anything, but I live in a foreign country using a second language every day of my life, and teaching my first language..to children and adults at that. If you can tell me why this has nothing to do with linguistics, I'd love to hear it. But what is happening in our online communications, is we are choosing to try and connect with what the majority of people who will agree with us. I believe this happens in real life too, and that this is how societies are formed. We create bonds with each other, and interact as best we can to uphold those bonds. Isn't it interesting that the responses keep growing here, and it is all of you either trying to push me down, or to bond with one another, the ones you already know? I agree that I am giving you limited information thus far. But what I am trying to say more than anything, is that language is about communication, and linguistics is about language. We can keep trying to tell each other how awesome we are to impress one another... this seems to be human nature, sadly. But in the end, if you don't have someone to interact with, you don't have language, and you don't have linguistics. I'm not saying it isn't interesting stuff, but I believe I am seeing a dangerous change in our interactions in anonymous environments. [SEP] I posted a question: "What is linguistics?"
-It’s the frequency that is a bit alarming. The Congressional Armed Services Committee Chairman said the readiness of the military is “at a crisis point” right after a staggering amount of accidents were happening in a months time frame. This is definitely not good for morale in the military as a whole, and this is why I can see it being a bigger issue than what you’re trying to belittle. It should frighten any military pilot not knowing if a simple flight will endanger the lives of other soldiers on board. Any naval aviator should be feel like they owe it to the passengers on board to make it where they need to go safely. It’s not about what frightens me in the grand scheme of things, it’s about the men and women in uniform who I’m putting in my plane. So, maybe it’s something for you to consider. It’s not about “you,” it’s about them. [SEP] So, maybe it’s something for you to consider. It’s not about “you,” it’s about them.
-so childish. please keep your mind open once you start making cool music. Music industry is really bad right now, this doesn't help it. [SEP] please keep your mind open once you start making cool music
-Fuck off. I'm not a "special brat" and I normally address these issues in person. As I've explained like 100 times in the thread already. > This kind of thinking needs to end It's not gonna end princess. It's not allowed to wear perfume at work. Because corporations and bosses are also special brats, apparently. Yet its probably the womyn complaining they don't get enough special treatment, like disabling others from working to seduce them with fake hormonal smells that reek. Women like you should stay at home. If there were a guy doing this, and someone told him to stop he would at least consider it, because he's aware he's wearing scents for others. And now others have told him it's just annoying. You would just tell them to fuck off, because? I dont know, apparently you think you're wearing perfume for you. Like how you wear makeup for you. Hilarious. You're being a cunt and you know it, and you just think it's up to me to deal with it. Maybe you can just stop? Who are you trying to impress anyway with your artificial pheromones? Maybe just work on respecting other people, and following generally accepted etiquette and you won't have any problems finding a decent boyfriend, then maybe you wouldn't have to wear obnoxious chemicals to trick people into thinking you're attractive. I love how you two jump on me for being a special snowflake when I could easily push the issue and get UW on my side... I assumed people would just be respectful but instead it appears you have to have rules in place or people dont listen. You're the only two self-identified women in this thread and you've both been massive cunts about it. If I knew who this girl was, I would have said something. And she probably would have listened. Just like you would have, despite your bullshit "I'm a strong womyn u can't tell me what to do" .. I've never once had a girl say no to me and I've asked things like this dozens of times. I'm not some scronny little awkward fuck that you're picturing. Again: if I knew who it was, or if it wasn't the second last class of the term, I would have said something. As the title says "classes", plural, I'm trying to tell girls at UW in general to think of other people. So far the reaction from women has been completely hostile. I'm not entirely surprised since I clearly don't think very highly of pampered women who cake on makeup and perfumes. [SEP] So far the reaction from women has been completely hostile.
--being surrounded by intellectuals (mostly) -flexible working hours -working on the weekends, campus totally barren, & having a beer on the rooftop deck afterwards -TEACHING. I LOVE being a TA. So much that I wonder whether my true calling is in teaching. [SEP] -being surrounded by intellectuals (mostly)
-I get what you're saying. I guess that situation was a bad example, mainly because I didn't cover the full context. I had asked her to roam as well as not going for Zed. I had pointed out to her that he was only building MR in passing phrases that were heads-ups as opposed to directly insinuating that she was incorrect in her actions. I.E. "Hey guys, looks like Zed rushed a Hexdrinker" or "Look out for CC'ing Zed he now has Mercs". It just seems equally unlikely that people learn from their 5+ deaths with or without any kind of acknowledgement from their team. So I was being as cordial as possible yet I get flamed. Then the game so typically deteriorates to them "trolling" or muting you though you merely offered up insight in to why they aren't playing to their possible potential. Not necessarily insulting them or being aggressive, just point to other people they COULD kill and they still take it as though you're attacking them. [SEP] I had asked her to roam as well as not going for Zed. I had pointed out to her that he was only building MR in passing phrases that were heads-ups as opposed to directly insinuating that she was incorrect in her actions. I.E. "Hey guys, looks like Zed rushed a Hexdrinker" or "Look out for CC'ing Zed he now has Mercs". It just seems equally unlikely that people learn from their 5+ deaths with or without any kind of acknowledgement from their team.
->You're being an idiot. It is not your whole definition but it is a major part of who you are. Again, I feel bad for you if you base your life even majorly on your sexuality. For being someone that's chastising everyone else on "OMG GUYS. GAWKER SAID SPIDERMANS CANT BE GAY!?" ( Even though he can be. )...You have a really super narrow view of life it would seem. I honestly feel bad for you, being totally unable to find people relate-able that are different from you it would seem >So it is what I said, so I do understand. Thanks. Yeah---Except for in every response you've made so far, you've been talking about Spiderman; like the fucking Headline you just "accepted" as being true. Spiderman can be whatever. Peter Parker can't. Not sure why you see that as wrong or bad---Considering there are MULTIPLE people that have taken the role as Spiderman; but apparently you're having a rough time with that. [SEP] Again, I feel bad for you if you base your life even majorly on your sexuality. For being someone that's chastising everyone else on "OMG GUYS. GAWKER SAID SPIDERMANS CANT BE GAY!?" ( Even though he can be. )...You have a really super narrow view of life it would seem. I honestly feel bad for you, being totally unable to find people relate-able that are different from you it would seem
-If you're a black person, you cannot get too angry or you'll be seen as aggressive. Certain clothing choices make you look like a gangster to some people. If you're a black woman, people touch and ask you countless questions about your hair. There are statistics stating overall in the dating scene black women are considered the least desirable dating prospect compared to other race, white women and Asians rank as the most desirable. It can seem more difficult for a black woman to be widely celebrated for her beauty or desirable to men of all races. It is common to receive backhanded insults such as you're smart or pretty for a black person. People thinking you're overly sensitive about racial issues. Only lighter skinned members of your race are accepted or seen as beautiful. People talking to you in hip hop slang with a wannabe "black" accent to relate to you. [SEP] It is common to receive backhanded insults such as you're smart or pretty for a black person.
-okay. so. the reason heavily religious people think atheists are so heartless, cruel, angry, hateful, etc, is because their entire worldview relies on atheists not being right. most atheists can't comprehend this, because us enlightened free thinkers are always willing to accept new ideas as long as they're based in evidence. for the highly religious, however, this is not the case, nor can it ever be the case so long as they remain highly religious. they cannot conceive of a world where it is possible for god to not exist. god is the reason for literally everything. for that to not be true, everything they know beyond the most mundane facts of life has to be wrong. simply by existing, atheists are perceived as saying "you're all wrong, and i'm going to destroy your world." tl;dr: atheists are insanely threatening to a religious mindset simply through continued existence [SEP] most atheists can't comprehend this
-> I mean it's not like I tried to discuss and then I just got told I'm wrong and don't know what I'm talking about. A) I didn't do that >I mean, it's not like someone could actually try to take a counterpoint to me while doing so politely. But I guess that is too much to ask. B) I did actually do that, earlier. C) It's late and I'm tired and grumpy, I have to be up for work in less than 6 hours, so I'll just say good day, sir. [SEP] A) I didn't do that
-Cool story. You missed the point. People in their 30's and later tend to want to spend time with their spouse or their child or on other things. That's cool. But you can't call it 'discrimination' if someone is putting in another 20 hours than you and probably works harder during the day because they are consumed by what they are working on. And please, tell me how much you know about a song that even historians debate... You're so sophisticated... [SEP] if someone is putting in another 20 hours than you and probably works harder during the day because they are consumed by what they are working on.
+>Steven claims to have been away from the Hoenn league and Mr Pokémon has the orbs from the games in HGSS. This means that RSE happens at least before Gen 4 and therefore before Gen 2, albeit not necesarilly at the same time as Gen 1. It's implied that there are multiple orbs considering the variety of NPCs that provide the orbs across multiple dimensions/timelines/realities. >The first reply in the reddit thread you linked literally states what I'm saying. Check how it says " DPPt/HGSS" and "Megaverse Sinnoh/Jhoto". You said "Megaverse" theory is the theory that everything got rebooted in gen 6". It was just revealed that the games past generation 6 exist on a separate timeline where history unfolded differently than the previous gens. >From the bulbagarden link: "B2W2 and XY happened at the same time, albeit in different universes" Um duh. The Megaverse/Mega Timeline theory is that every game stays within the same chronological order, with the only difference being the existence of mega evolution. The timeline split at the 3000 year old war. Mega timeline: War took place [3000 years] Kanto/Hoenn [3 years] Johto/Sinnoh [unspecified time] Unova [2 years] Unova/Kalos [2 years] Alola. Megas exist. Non Mega timeline: War did not take place [300 years] Kanto/Hoenn [3 years] Johto/Sinnoh etc. etc. etc. Megas do not exist. Zinnia's claims support this. There's a reality where the war didn't take place and megas do not exist. That's the non-mega timeline. >The youtube video also states that Gen 6 is from a timeline(another mistake, as Zinnia refers to "worlds", not timelines) apart from previous games. And here's where you reveal your lack of understanding. I see why you're confused and misinformed now. You're getting caught up on the word "timeline" itself. In the English language, when discussing multiple parallel universes/realities/dimensions/worlds, the word timeline is often synonymous the the previous three words. To jump from one reality to a parallel reality is the same as crossing from one timeline to another. To jump from one world to a parallel world is describing the same thing. This is a fundamental tenet of 'multiverse theory,' generally speaking. Let's make this easier for you to comprehend. Say on my afternoon jog I come to a fork in the road. Let's say I chose to take the right fork. I finish my jog around 5 pm, come home, and am now replying to a very confused user on reddit. In a alternate reality (remember our synonyms here: timeline, world, universe, dimension) I had chosen to take the left fork in the road. In that reality, time still progresses, yet different outcomes occur due to my decisions. In this alternate dimension, as I'm finishing my jog around 5 pm, a bus swerves to miss a stray animal and crosses my path, killing me. This timeline of events runs parallel and alternate to the one that I am experiencing right now. The English dialogue in the games tends to favor the words 'dimension' and 'world' to keep it kid friendly. However, I see that even this simplification managed to confuse you, my friend. Hoopa is stated to pull entire islands (mirage islands) from different dimensions Burnet studies the dimensional research lab Zinnia refers to an alternate world where megas don't exist In SM and USUM, when changing between day/night it refers to it as the other world That last one is yet another prime example. Sun and Moon are two different realities where time progresses in (near) parallel despite events unfolding differently. In one world Nebby evolves into Lunala and in the other Nebby evolves into Solgaleo. Two timelines, two realities, to universes, nice and simple. >>Minor sidenote, I've only met one other user on this sub who is incapable of understanding basic multiverse theory so I'll page them to read this explanation. Though, they sort of get a pass because english is not their native language. Paging /u/DrasilReborn~ >people keep talking about "timelines" despite time travel not being involved Oh bless your heart. >Also, the only thing you had so far was a lazy asset reuse on a post-game facility. Two separate instances lazy reuse. The sloppiness is one thing, the recurrence just takes it to a whole new level of sloppy. You don't disagree it's lazy. Still doesn't excuse the fact that this laziness is cause for confusion. Let's not brush off the messy and conflicting regional origins of megas. No, your headcanons of isolationist societies are not substantiated. >What we have is enough. Since there's still debate, obviously not. > Those two only happened because they were closely related to a previous game, but that's not how this franchise works in general. I'll give you that considering the standalone nature of each game. But a single line of text from an NPC wouldn't hurt. Hell, Red's presence wasn't even alluded to until very late in the game. > However there IS info given that is ignored. More info wont really help matters because this fanbase doesn't actually care You say this, yet here we are, on a pokemon fan forum, replying to one of the nigh weekly discussions on the timeline. >And yet, some people can get it. Which is good. BUt not nearly enough to warrant a broad consensus. >I do because they're the ones to blame, as seen, proven and not disproven. Even you, who claim to have the timeline down so well, are still labile to picking and choosing which bits of information to give weight to. You and I agree on quite a bit concerning the general structure, but it's the small details that we've been arguing about these past few days. The devil is in the details, bud. [SEP] For every possible outcome, multiverse theory states there's a split in a timeline/reality where time progresses following the outcome of one decision/choice/event, and another where time progresses following the outcome of the other decision/choice/event.
+Part 3: So I came here, to have a discussion about linguistics. What is linguistics? http "Linguistics is the scientific study of human language." Scientific study of human language. What is scientific study? Well you can feel free to disagree with me if I am wrong, but I believe that it involves the scientific method, which is a process of creating a hypothesis.. performing experiments, looking for patterns, and thus coming to conclusions. I think we all know what scientific study really is. What is language? "Language may refer either to the specifically human capacity for acquiring and using complex systems of communication, or to a specific instance of such a system of complex communication. The scientific study of language in any of its senses is called linguistics." This is already stupidly complex, language is communication. It can involve speaking, signaling, and I would say even just understanding, it is simply communicating. What I have been doing from the start here in my series, is attempting to have a conversation about linguistics. I asked a question in my first post referenced, "What is linguistics?" While I agree it may have been slightly distracting to post "(feel free to answer me!) afterwards, the fact of the matter is, And rather than anyone willing to actually explain to me what linguistics is, as we might do in actual human interactions, I got a total of three responses asking me what the question was. My question was, "What is linguistics?" What can we observe from this? My idea: We are not willing to bond with just one person in an anonymous public environment on the internet. I suspect this is because we are scared of risking our other bonds. I even attempted to get to know you people, anyone reading this. I gave you my background. I may not have gone to graduate school for linguistics or anything, but I live in a foreign country using a second language every day of my life, and teaching my first language..to children and adults at that. If you can tell me why this has nothing to do with linguistics, I'd love to hear it. But what is happening in our online communications, is we are choosing to try and connect with what the majority of people who will agree with us. I believe this happens in real life too, and that this is how societies are formed. We create bonds with each other, and interact as best we can to uphold those bonds. Isn't it interesting that the responses keep growing here, and it is all of you either trying to push me down, or to bond with one another, the ones you already know? I agree that I am giving you limited information thus far. But what I am trying to say more than anything, is that language is about communication, and linguistics is about language. We can keep trying to tell each other how awesome we are to impress one another... this seems to be human nature, sadly. But in the end, if you don't have someone to interact with, you don't have language, and you don't have linguistics. I'm not saying it isn't interesting stuff, but I believe I am seeing a dangerous change in our interactions in anonymous environments. [SEP] I posted a question: "What is linguistics?"
+It’s the frequency that is a bit alarming. The Congressional Armed Services Committee Chairman said the readiness of the military is “at a crisis point” right after a staggering amount of accidents were happening in a months time frame. This is definitely not good for morale in the military as a whole, and this is why I can see it being a bigger issue than what you’re trying to belittle. It should frighten any military pilot not knowing if a simple flight will endanger the lives of other soldiers on board. Any naval aviator should be feel like they owe it to the passengers on board to make it where they need to go safely. It’s not about what frightens me in the grand scheme of things, it’s about the men and women in uniform who I’m putting in my plane. [SEP] So, maybe it’s something for you to consider. It’s not about “you,” it’s about them.
+so childish. . Music industry is really bad right now, this doesn't help it. [SEP] please keep your mind open once you start making cool music
+Fuck off. I'm not a "special brat" and I normally address these issues in person. As I've explained like 100 times in the thread already. > This kind of thinking needs to end It's not gonna end princess. It's not allowed to wear perfume at work. Because corporations and bosses are also special brats, apparently. Yet its probably the womyn complaining they don't get enough special treatment, like disabling others from working to seduce them with fake hormonal smells that reek. Women like you should stay at home. If there were a guy doing this, and someone told him to stop he would at least consider it, because he's aware he's wearing scents for others. And now others have told him it's just annoying. You would just tell them to fuck off, because? I dont know, apparently you think you're wearing perfume for you. Like how you wear makeup for you. Hilarious. You're being a cunt and you know it, and you just think it's up to me to deal with it. Maybe you can just stop? Who are you trying to impress anyway with your artificial pheromones? Maybe just work on respecting other people, and following generally accepted etiquette and you won't have any problems finding a decent boyfriend, then maybe you wouldn't have to wear obnoxious chemicals to trick people into thinking you're attractive. I love how you two jump on me for being a special snowflake when I could easily push the issue and get UW on my side... I assumed people would just be respectful but instead it appears you have to have rules in place or people dont listen. You're the only two self-identified women in this thread and you've both been massive cunts about it. If I knew who this girl was, I would have said something. And she probably would have listened. Just like you would have, despite your bullshit "I'm a strong womyn u can't tell me what to do" .. I've never once had a girl say no to me and I've asked things like this dozens of times. I'm not some scronny little awkward fuck that you're picturing. Again: if I knew who it was, or if it wasn't the second last class of the term, I would have said something. As the title says "classes", plural, I'm trying to tell girls at UW in general to think of other people. I'm not entirely surprised since I clearly don't think very highly of pampered women who cake on makeup and perfumes. [SEP] So far the reaction from women has been completely hostile.
+-flexible working hours -working on the weekends, campus totally barren, & having a beer on the rooftop deck afterwards -TEACHING. I LOVE being a TA. So much that I wonder whether my true calling is in teaching. [SEP] -being surrounded by intellectuals (mostly)
+I get what you're saying. I guess that situation was a bad example, mainly because I didn't cover the full context. So I was being as cordial as possible yet I get flamed. Then the game so typically deteriorates to them "trolling" or muting you though you merely offered up insight in to why they aren't playing to their possible potential. Not necessarily insulting them or being aggressive, just point to other people they COULD kill and they still take it as though you're attacking them. [SEP] I had asked her to roam as well as not going for Zed. I had pointed out to her that he was only building MR in passing phrases that were heads-ups as opposed to directly insinuating that she was incorrect in her actions. I.E. "Hey guys, looks like Zed rushed a Hexdrinker" or "Look out for CC'ing Zed he now has Mercs". It just seems equally unlikely that people learn from their 5+ deaths with or without any kind of acknowledgement from their team.
+>You're being an idiot. It is not your whole definition but it is a major part of who you are. >So it is what I said, so I do understand. Thanks. Yeah---Except for in every response you've made so far, you've been talking about Spiderman; like the fucking Headline you just "accepted" as being true. Spiderman can be whatever. Peter Parker can't. Not sure why you see that as wrong or bad---Considering there are MULTIPLE people that have taken the role as Spiderman; but apparently you're having a rough time with that. [SEP] Again, I feel bad for you if you base your life even majorly on your sexuality. For being someone that's chastising everyone else on "OMG GUYS. GAWKER SAID SPIDERMANS CANT BE GAY!?" ( Even though he can be. )...You have a really super narrow view of life it would seem. I honestly feel bad for you, being totally unable to find people relate-able that are different from you it would seem
+If you're a black person, you cannot get too angry or you'll be seen as aggressive. Certain clothing choices make you look like a gangster to some people. If you're a black woman, people touch and ask you countless questions about your hair. There are statistics stating overall in the dating scene black women are considered the least desirable dating prospect compared to other race, white women and Asians rank as the most desirable. It can seem more difficult for a black woman to be widely celebrated for her beauty or desirable to men of all races. People thinking you're overly sensitive about racial issues. Only lighter skinned members of your race are accepted or seen as beautiful. People talking to you in hip hop slang with a wannabe "black" accent to relate to you. [SEP] It is common to receive backhanded insults such as you're smart or pretty for a black person.
+okay. so. the reason heavily religious people think atheists are so heartless, cruel, angry, hateful, etc, is because their entire worldview relies on atheists not being right. , because us enlightened free thinkers are always willing to accept new ideas as long as they're based in evidence. for the highly religious, however, this is not the case, nor can it ever be the case so long as they remain highly religious. they cannot conceive of a world where it is possible for god to not exist. god is the reason for literally everything. for that to not be true, everything they know beyond the most mundane facts of life has to be wrong. simply by existing, atheists are perceived as saying "you're all wrong, and i'm going to destroy your world." tl;dr: atheists are insanely threatening to a religious mindset simply through continued existence [SEP] most atheists can't comprehend this
+> I mean it's not like I tried to discuss and then I just got told I'm wrong and don't know what I'm talking about. >I mean, it's not like someone could actually try to take a counterpoint to me while doing so politely. But I guess that is too much to ask. B) I did actually do that, earlier. C) It's late and I'm tired and grumpy, I have to be up for work in less than 6 hours, so I'll just say good day, sir. [SEP] A) I didn't do that
+Cool story. You missed the point. People in their 30's and later tend to want to spend time with their spouse or their child or on other things. That's cool. But you can't call it 'discrimination' And please, tell me how much you know about a song that even historians debate... You're so sophisticated... [SEP] if someone is putting in another 20 hours than you and probably works harder during the day because they are consumed by what they are working on.
 Rust seems to be overtaken by a new generation of players that seem to think that Rust is one big deathmatch game. Just suggesting nerfing the raiding mechanics even in the slightest gets you more shit than you can find in a pigsty. I think its pretty easy to solve by just boosting the amount of resources needed for C4, not making walls breakable by melee, and making walls generally stronger. But for some reason Facepunch seems very reluctant in regards to balancing the raiding aspect of the game. Maybe to make the game more appealing to casual gamers. I remember the good old legacy days where raiding was something you prepared for. Are you going with the 5 c4 your team already has stored and looking for a smaller base, or is your team gonna keep on farming in order to take on that big base you've been scouting the last couple of days. Raiding took effort, it took time. And a lot of times you even ended up empty handed, or with your C4 stolen, and yeah that sucked. But that feeling you got after a succesful raid was crazy satisfying and such a rush. Now there seems to be an entitlement that raiding should be as easy as joining a server, and god forbid a base is actually hard to get into [SEP] new generation of players that seem to think that Rust is one big deathmatch game...Just suggesting nerfing the raiding mechanics even in the slightest gets you more shit than you can find in a pigsty.
-So essentially, you think the 36 gold Ogre + support gets and 359 gold the carry gets is going to be enough to make you able to leave the lane and immediately turn around mid whose gold deficit is probably more like a thousand at this point, while your offlaner is sitting all alone at perma-level 1? Man I knew people overrated blink but by this much? [SEP] Man I knew people overrated blink but by this much?
->Light requires time to travel. Time is required for the combustion of fuel that creates the light. Picture it like you had a lantern and time stopped. There would be no time, but the lantern would still be the source of the light >Perhaps you have another example? There can’t be a concrete example of something permanently timeless since all of our senses depend on time. We wouldn’t ever even be aware of it if we ourselves were to go into a timeless state. But the examples here just serve to help understand it (which apparently a lot of people find difficult), not to prove it. There’s nothing contradictory about having causation without time – all effects would just take place instantly. Saying “it doesn’t make sense to me so I think its wrong” is just an argument from incredulity. Plus we know there must be causation that doesn’t depend on time. If there couldn’t be atemporal causation, then what could cause time itself? The only other option would be that there had been an infinite amount of time, but infinites are logically impossible so that can’t be the case. >If the universe (in one form or another) existed in this "atemporal" state, then there is no need for a deity Removing time from the equation doesn’t change anything. For anything at all that exists, you’ve only got three explanations that it even makes sense to propose for why that thing ultimately exists. Either: A) An infinite chain of sources, stretching back infinitely (like you exist because your parents existed who existed because your grandparents existed who...) B) A logically required source (as in, something that is incapable of nonexistence. It has to exist for the same reason 1+1 has to = 2: its a logical contradiction for it to not be the case) Or C) There is no source. Things started existing without any cause for no reason There really can't be anything other than those three: its either 0 sources, a finite number of sources, or an infinite number of sources. How long it took a thing to exist - whether instantly or after three thousand years - is totally irrelevant to this. [SEP] Saying “it doesn’t make sense to me so I think its wrong” is just an argument from incredulity.
-They do have a partnership/sponsorship with MSI and yes I guess they do play on MSI products but they probably do more. I would not address them as hipsters... [SEP] I would not address them as hipsters...
-White dude here. Personally I love seeing a cop and being reasonably sure that I won't be randomly hassled. And walking through a parking garage at night without clutching my keys. And how most people I meet seem to trust me without any justification, or assume that I know what I'm talking about even if someone much more qualified is standing next to me. Being broke sure isn't a cakewalk, but it should make you super happy you're not broke and a minority. [SEP] should make you super happy you're not broke and a minority.
-Yeah move those goal posts. OP said a judge NEEDS to display a calm demeanor, at all times, regardless of life circumstances, as a prerequisite for office. Good luck finding any judges at all with that criteria. [SEP] Yeah move those goal posts.
-Try to avoid arguing with 14 year olds. They might mistakenly believe they have an opinion. [SEP] Try to avoid arguing with 14 year olds. They might mistakenly believe they have an opinion.
-> Do you understand that a strictly beans and rice diet doesn't give you the proper sustenance? Do you understand I never suggested a strictly beans and rice diet? Got any other straw men you want to beat the shit out of? [SEP] Got any other straw men you want to beat the shit out of?
-You said there are no laws at all in 32 states governing private gun sales, not there are 32 states that don’t require background checks. That’s a huge difference. Again, you seem a little confused and maybe even stupid. Furthermore, 23 states do require background checks for private s sales. Your math sucks on top of your writing accuracy. [SEP] Furthermore, 23 states do require background checks for private s sales. Your math sucks on top of your writing accuracy.
-My problem with what you're saying in your post, or your general espousing of "religion" is that you seem to be conflating religion with spirituality and philosophy. Someone can have a perfectly healthy spiritual life, meditating on ontological questions, while simultaneously rejecting religion and the false promises it offers. Earlier you said: > It (religion) was not built for factually explaining the physical mechanics of the world, it is better suited to guiding a human through the murky depths of their gut reactions. To wit I say religion is the intellectually-poor man's philosophical logic, in that it purports to provide answers and guidance to those incapable of discovering the answers on their own. And there's nothing wrong with that. [SEP] To wit I say religion is the intellectually-poor man's philosophical logic, in that it purports to provide answers and guidance to those incapable of discovering the answers on their own. And there's nothing wrong with that.
-Perhaps we're of different generations. (Maybe this is why I spend almost more time on Malefashionadvice than femalefashionadvice! The men seem a little older!) But some people say fashion is the art of keeping up with the trends, of making sure to spend a bazillion hours a week researching blogs and websites, and running yourself ragged making sure to always have the latest stuff. On the other hand, style might be defined as the art of expressing one's personality through clothing choices, something that might not change as much from one decade to the next. So while fashion magazines and websites might be important if you're in your teens and twenties and are interested in wearing the latest neon colors, books become more important for those old enough to realize neon is not very flattering on 99% of those with European skin coloring. Here are a few things I've learned from books: 1.) How do I dress for my particular shape? (How can I minimize a large bust / enhance a small bust? Make my legs look longer? Appear taller?) Waistlines go up and down with trends, for example but if you know what looks good on you (say, empire waists), you'll purchase several items in empire waists in classic, solid colors while they're on trend to make it through the drought when they're not. Good tailoring for your body in particular is part of this; tailoring seems to be discussed a great deal more in books than in magazines and websites. Choosing colors best for your skintone also might be something books can help with. 2.) What materials are best for me? If you're still in your teens and twenties, you might still purchasing the polyester junk from Forever 21 and H&M. But as you age, you begin to appreciate the comfort and breathability of real cotton, silk, and wool. Polyester has indeed improved since the '70's, but it still doesn't float like real silk, nor will it keep you both warm and cool like wool, which wicks away sweat amazingly well. Books can be great for emphasizing real quality in materials and stitchery; magazines tend to focus more on who designed something instead of the seamstress who sewed it up. (Yes, good designers tend to use good quality materials on average, but some start out with a famous name brand, and then start making crap. I looked at a whole bunch of Calvin Klein suits recently at Macy's.... they were all polyester!) 3.) A little black dress has been popular since Audrey Hepburn. Burberry gave us the trench coat. A striped tee has been popular since Coco Chanel. Brands like Old Navy and Ralph Lauren have built their entire lines around the nautical feel Chanel gave us! As Urthwhyte says, it's great to know a little about history so you can know what pieces are classic and spend real money on something that will never go out of style. And yes, that does indeed change! Charmian Carr (Liesl) was encouraged to spend her earnings from The Sound of Music on a fabulous fur coat, which would "never go out of style." And then animal rights activists started pouring things on and throwing things at people who wore them, and things changed. But in general, there are some things that have stayed the same, and it's nice to know how to pick out a good pair of classic black pants that I can wear with that blouse that simply doesn't go with anything else. tl;dr: Magazines and websites are great for following what's currently trendy. Books are great for figuring out which shapes and colors are best for you, what makes a quality garment, and what sorts of things might be more classic, that you can wear forever. [SEP] making sure to spend a bazillion hours a week researching blogs and websites, and running yourself ragged making sure to always have the latest stuff
-I don't like to be told that, because I don't support their conclusions! I can't control how you react to what I say. So why on Earth should I be responsible for how you react to what I say? "Here's this bomb. You don't control when the bomb goes off, it's controlled by every person you interact with. If it hurts someone, it's your fault." Obviously there are limits to this. This view is for non-creepy, non-offensive shit only. Like "you're very well spoken," which is only offensive if you tell yourself a story about why the person saying it said it. [SEP] So why on Earth should I be responsible for how you react to what I say?
-Where to start... I am asking if drawing a conclusion about a population from what I deem to be a representative sample is sexist. My proposition is that it is not. >Based on my experience: Native Americans must not like board games at all. Ok, I don't know how many native americans you've (tried to) board game with. But, to make such a strong conclusion, it would have to be a LOT. Even then...it's a bit much. On the other hand, if you've tried playing board games with many native americans and none are really into it, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that your experience is that native americans seems less interested in playing board games than (insert other race). It's up to you to determine the credibility of your sample and decide whether you can make the leap to conclude that you think that native americans as a whole are less interested in board games than (insert other race). Seems ok to me. >If I offer suggestions, based on my experience, I will am terrible, awful and stupid. Can you explain this? If I've found that women I play with tend to like game X, why is it bad to recommend that game upon finding out the person asking is a woman? >For fcks sake :: If you like playing a game recommend it. If you don't offer another suggestion. If you think any gaming is gender specific then you have not been paying attention. Yikes! I'd definitely not recommend a game simply because I like it. It's important to take into account characteristics of the person asking for the recommendation. I love Caylus, but I'll never recommend it to someone who's just getting into gaming! >You don't know the gender of a username, unless they disclose it. Good point! I'm talking more about when the gender is known. >Because you are saying "them females don't like heavier games" I'm actually saying that my experience is that females don't tend to like heavier games than men and I'm assuming the population follows the same trend. This is different than what you're claiming I've said. >"My experience has been that males tend to prefer xbox than females." SEXIST and completely NOT True. Women out number men in buying consoles and console games. Interesting! So, the correct statement would be "Females tend to prefer xbox over males", correct? Now, suppose that in my sample of friends, this is exactly what I'd observed and this is the conclusion I drew about the population - would that also be sexist? If not, then why is it sexist when I conclude that males tend to prefer xbox over females? It may be the wrong conclusion, but I don't think it's sexist. >"My experience has been that blacks tend to prefer heavier games than whites." If this is what I've observed, why is it racist? I'm genuinely asking. I'm not saying they prefer heavier games because they're black, I'm just suggesting that the evidence says there's some connection. >Males are diverse, have preferences that aren't based on their gender ... so why would you say that about females. I don't think I said that anywhere about females. To clarify - I think there's a connection between gender and the weight of games that they tend to like. I don't think that's the only variable that determines game preferences for either gender and I don't think I ever claimed that to be the case. [SEP] I think there's a connection between gender and the weight of games that they tend to like.
+So essentially, you think the 36 gold Ogre + support gets and 359 gold the carry gets is going to be enough to make you able to leave the lane and immediately turn around mid whose gold deficit is probably more like a thousand at this point, while your offlaner is sitting all alone at perma-level 1? [SEP] Man I knew people overrated blink but by this much?
+>Light requires time to travel. Time is required for the combustion of fuel that creates the light. Picture it like you had a lantern and time stopped. There would be no time, but the lantern would still be the source of the light >Perhaps you have another example? There can’t be a concrete example of something permanently timeless since all of our senses depend on time. We wouldn’t ever even be aware of it if we ourselves were to go into a timeless state. But the examples here just serve to help understand it (which apparently a lot of people find difficult), not to prove it. There’s nothing contradictory about having causation without time – all effects would just take place instantly. Plus we know there must be causation that doesn’t depend on time. If there couldn’t be atemporal causation, then what could cause time itself? The only other option would be that there had been an infinite amount of time, but infinites are logically impossible so that can’t be the case. >If the universe (in one form or another) existed in this "atemporal" state, then there is no need for a deity Removing time from the equation doesn’t change anything. For anything at all that exists, you’ve only got three explanations that it even makes sense to propose for why that thing ultimately exists. Either: A) An infinite chain of sources, stretching back infinitely (like you exist because your parents existed who existed because your grandparents existed who...) B) A logically required source (as in, something that is incapable of nonexistence. It has to exist for the same reason 1+1 has to = 2: its a logical contradiction for it to not be the case) Or C) There is no source. Things started existing without any cause for no reason There really can't be anything other than those three: its either 0 sources, a finite number of sources, or an infinite number of sources. How long it took a thing to exist - whether instantly or after three thousand years - is totally irrelevant to this. [SEP] Saying “it doesn’t make sense to me so I think its wrong” is just an argument from incredulity.
+They do have a partnership/sponsorship with MSI and yes I guess they do play on MSI products but they probably do more. [SEP] I would not address them as hipsters...
+White dude here. Personally I love seeing a cop and being reasonably sure that I won't be randomly hassled. And walking through a parking garage at night without clutching my keys. And how most people I meet seem to trust me without any justification, or assume that I know what I'm talking about even if someone much more qualified is standing next to me. Being broke sure isn't a cakewalk, but it [SEP] should make you super happy you're not broke and a minority.
+OP said a judge NEEDS to display a calm demeanor, at all times, regardless of life circumstances, as a prerequisite for office. Good luck finding any judges at all with that criteria. [SEP] Yeah move those goal posts.
+ [SEP] Try to avoid arguing with 14 year olds. They might mistakenly believe they have an opinion.
+> Do you understand that a strictly beans and rice diet doesn't give you the proper sustenance? Do you understand I never suggested a strictly beans and rice diet? [SEP] Got any other straw men you want to beat the shit out of?
+You said there are no laws at all in 32 states governing private gun sales, not there are 32 states that don’t require background checks. That’s a huge difference. Again, you seem a little confused and maybe even stupid. [SEP] Furthermore, 23 states do require background checks for private s sales. Your math sucks on top of your writing accuracy.
+My problem with what you're saying in your post, or your general espousing of "religion" is that you seem to be conflating religion with spirituality and philosophy. Someone can have a perfectly healthy spiritual life, meditating on ontological questions, while simultaneously rejecting religion and the false promises it offers. Earlier you said: > It (religion) was not built for factually explaining the physical mechanics of the world, it is better suited to guiding a human through the murky depths of their gut reactions. [SEP] To wit I say religion is the intellectually-poor man's philosophical logic, in that it purports to provide answers and guidance to those incapable of discovering the answers on their own. And there's nothing wrong with that.
+Perhaps we're of different generations. (Maybe this is why I spend almost more time on Malefashionadvice than femalefashionadvice! The men seem a little older!) But some people say fashion is the art of keeping up with the trends, of . On the other hand, style might be defined as the art of expressing one's personality through clothing choices, something that might not change as much from one decade to the next. So while fashion magazines and websites might be important if you're in your teens and twenties and are interested in wearing the latest neon colors, books become more important for those old enough to realize neon is not very flattering on 99% of those with European skin coloring. Here are a few things I've learned from books: 1.) How do I dress for my particular shape? (How can I minimize a large bust / enhance a small bust? Make my legs look longer? Appear taller?) Waistlines go up and down with trends, for example but if you know what looks good on you (say, empire waists), you'll purchase several items in empire waists in classic, solid colors while they're on trend to make it through the drought when they're not. Good tailoring for your body in particular is part of this; tailoring seems to be discussed a great deal more in books than in magazines and websites. Choosing colors best for your skintone also might be something books can help with. 2.) What materials are best for me? If you're still in your teens and twenties, you might still purchasing the polyester junk from Forever 21 and H&M. But as you age, you begin to appreciate the comfort and breathability of real cotton, silk, and wool. Polyester has indeed improved since the '70's, but it still doesn't float like real silk, nor will it keep you both warm and cool like wool, which wicks away sweat amazingly well. Books can be great for emphasizing real quality in materials and stitchery; magazines tend to focus more on who designed something instead of the seamstress who sewed it up. (Yes, good designers tend to use good quality materials on average, but some start out with a famous name brand, and then start making crap. I looked at a whole bunch of Calvin Klein suits recently at Macy's.... they were all polyester!) 3.) A little black dress has been popular since Audrey Hepburn. Burberry gave us the trench coat. A striped tee has been popular since Coco Chanel. Brands like Old Navy and Ralph Lauren have built their entire lines around the nautical feel Chanel gave us! As Urthwhyte says, it's great to know a little about history so you can know what pieces are classic and spend real money on something that will never go out of style. And yes, that does indeed change! Charmian Carr (Liesl) was encouraged to spend her earnings from The Sound of Music on a fabulous fur coat, which would "never go out of style." And then animal rights activists started pouring things on and throwing things at people who wore them, and things changed. But in general, there are some things that have stayed the same, and it's nice to know how to pick out a good pair of classic black pants that I can wear with that blouse that simply doesn't go with anything else. tl;dr: Magazines and websites are great for following what's currently trendy. Books are great for figuring out which shapes and colors are best for you, what makes a quality garment, and what sorts of things might be more classic, that you can wear forever. [SEP] making sure to spend a bazillion hours a week researching blogs and websites, and running yourself ragged making sure to always have the latest stuff
+I don't like to be told that, because I don't support their conclusions! I can't control how you react to what I say. "Here's this bomb. You don't control when the bomb goes off, it's controlled by every person you interact with. If it hurts someone, it's your fault." Obviously there are limits to this. This view is for non-creepy, non-offensive shit only. Like "you're very well spoken," which is only offensive if you tell yourself a story about why the person saying it said it. [SEP] So why on Earth should I be responsible for how you react to what I say?
+Where to start... I am asking if drawing a conclusion about a population from what I deem to be a representative sample is sexist. My proposition is that it is not. >Based on my experience: Native Americans must not like board games at all. Ok, I don't know how many native americans you've (tried to) board game with. But, to make such a strong conclusion, it would have to be a LOT. Even then...it's a bit much. On the other hand, if you've tried playing board games with many native americans and none are really into it, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that your experience is that native americans seems less interested in playing board games than (insert other race). It's up to you to determine the credibility of your sample and decide whether you can make the leap to conclude that you think that native americans as a whole are less interested in board games than (insert other race). Seems ok to me. >If I offer suggestions, based on my experience, I will am terrible, awful and stupid. Can you explain this? If I've found that women I play with tend to like game X, why is it bad to recommend that game upon finding out the person asking is a woman? >For fcks sake :: If you like playing a game recommend it. If you don't offer another suggestion. If you think any gaming is gender specific then you have not been paying attention. Yikes! I'd definitely not recommend a game simply because I like it. It's important to take into account characteristics of the person asking for the recommendation. I love Caylus, but I'll never recommend it to someone who's just getting into gaming! >You don't know the gender of a username, unless they disclose it. Good point! I'm talking more about when the gender is known. >Because you are saying "them females don't like heavier games" I'm actually saying that my experience is that females don't tend to like heavier games than men and I'm assuming the population follows the same trend. This is different than what you're claiming I've said. >"My experience has been that males tend to prefer xbox than females." SEXIST and completely NOT True. Women out number men in buying consoles and console games. Interesting! So, the correct statement would be "Females tend to prefer xbox over males", correct? Now, suppose that in my sample of friends, this is exactly what I'd observed and this is the conclusion I drew about the population - would that also be sexist? If not, then why is it sexist when I conclude that males tend to prefer xbox over females? It may be the wrong conclusion, but I don't think it's sexist. >"My experience has been that blacks tend to prefer heavier games than whites." If this is what I've observed, why is it racist? I'm genuinely asking. I'm not saying they prefer heavier games because they're black, I'm just suggesting that the evidence says there's some connection. >Males are diverse, have preferences that aren't based on their gender ... so why would you say that about females. I don't think I said that anywhere about females. To clarify - I don't think that's the only variable that determines game preferences for either gender and I don't think I ever claimed that to be the case. [SEP] I think there's a connection between gender and the weight of games that they tend to like.
 It mentions the relation in the article. Of course articles are too much for you aren't they now kiddo? [SEP] "articles are too much for you aren't they now kiddo?"
-> Their justification is voting for the lesser of two evils They don't even try to justify all the shit Trump said/did during the campaign. They loved the racists sexist remarks. They all cried "but hillary's emails" anytime someone wanted them to defend Trump's hideous behavior. >even if Trump turns out to be the greater of the two evils. Turns out? It was blatant for 2 years he was the greater evil. It's a fucking false equivalency to say Hillary is anywhere near as bad as Trump. But these people think Intelligent Design and Science are equal. They don't know shit about reality. [SEP] But these people think Intelligent Design and Science are equal. They don't know shit about reality.
-"Mr. Boss, you have years of experience, you manage a team of experienced, results producing programmers who don't complain about the floor plan. I'm brand new to the company, hell, to the industry, but I don't like how you're doing things. You need to make special arrangements for me." What you call defeatist I call realistic. [SEP] who don't complain about the floor plan
-when did we reset our relations with them? and why is not excusable for a candidate for office be talking to russians related to their government? that should be bringing up alarms. [SEP] that should be bringing up alarms.
-The problem is that various groups of men are lumped into the category of “nice guy”: the friendzoned, the men who think niceness is attractive, the people who really do think they should be rewarded with sex for being nice, the chivalrous, etc. You can’t really critique the term “nice guy” because its only egregious offenders that are labelled as "nice guys”, the rest are just simply invisible and forgotten. [SEP] The problem is that various groups of men are lumped into the category of “nice guy”: the friendzoned, the men who think niceness is attractive, the people who really do think they should be rewarded with sex for being nice, the chivalrous, etc.
+> Their justification is voting for the lesser of two evils They don't even try to justify all the shit Trump said/did during the campaign. They loved the racists sexist remarks. They all cried "but hillary's emails" anytime someone wanted them to defend Trump's hideous behavior. >even if Trump turns out to be the greater of the two evils. Turns out? It was blatant for 2 years he was the greater evil. It's a fucking false equivalency to say Hillary is anywhere near as bad as Trump. [SEP] But these people think Intelligent Design and Science are equal. They don't know shit about reality.
+"Mr. Boss, you have years of experience, you manage a team of experienced, results producing programmers . I'm brand new to the company, hell, to the industry, but I don't like how you're doing things. You need to make special arrangements for me." What you call defeatist I call realistic. [SEP] who don't complain about the floor plan
+when did we reset our relations with them? and why is not excusable for a candidate for office be talking to russians related to their government? [SEP] that should be bringing up alarms.
+You can’t really critique the term “nice guy” because its only egregious offenders that are labelled as "nice guys”, the rest are just simply invisible and forgotten. [SEP] The problem is that various groups of men are lumped into the category of “nice guy”: the friendzoned, the men who think niceness is attractive, the people who really do think they should be rewarded with sex for being nice, the chivalrous, etc.
 >What I really enjoyed about this post in particular, were his concepts of the characteristics of an omniscient God; which I thought were extremely insightful. The only issue that I had, was with his assumptions of God's judgment. You enjoyed his assumptions of one god's characteristics because they matched what you were taught/believe, but you don't like his assumptions in this same god's judgment because they don't match what you were taught/believe. Correct? Do us a favour and forgo "discussing" about any person not being able to understand/perceive this mythical creature's intentions if you're going to spend the next few paragraphs speaking about how you know them as well as referring to a piece of pre-(modern) science science fiction. May Thor be with you. [SEP] Do us a favour and forgo "discussing" about any person not being able >to understand/perceive this mythical creature's intentions if you're >going to spend the next few paragraphs speaking about how you >know them as well as referring to a piece of pre-(modern) science >science fiction. May Thor be with you.
-> Okay, fuck it, I'll just continue working with a hernia until I'm 65 strictly because libertarians take ideological issue with the notion of communal empathy. No they take an issue with using force in executing such empathy. You assume that not wanting force people to do X=not wanting people to do X. > So where's that 90 thousand now? Never went to a hospital once. Insurance is about amortizing risk over a long period of time. I fear you might misunderstand how insurance works. > Maybe I'm not smart enough to figure out how but I'm certainly sensible enough to know that we can afford healthcare for everyone. The how is the most important part. Not all proposals for how will be affordable. I'm fully willing to discuss the merits and flaws of a given proposal or set of them. My response was primarily addressing the idea that the increase in cost for a medicare-for-all proposal would be trivial. >Anyway, sorry for the rant. Bad day on this end. Write me back after you've watched the video. And don't gloat when your side wins.... Cheers! I don't like to see debates as winning and losing. Debates should be about subjecting your views to scrutiny and refining it, and at least one but hopefully both parties coming out with a better understanding and better arguments, even if they don't change their ultimate conclusion. [SEP] I fear you might misunderstand how insurance works.
-A better word would be "women" in any case. I've never heard anyone personally use the word "males" in place of men, but I've heard people say "females" plenty of times. I will admit that with the rise of the alt-right and their association with the RedPill/Niceguys/Neckbeards^TM this word is getting noticed more in that group. That's all I was trying to point out, that the word is used by a group of undesirable people. [SEP] I've never heard anyone personally use the word "males" in place of men
-> If you haven't heard of it, then you lack a position on the topic. That's pretty simple. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. When you haven't heard of something, you don't believe in it. If I were to ask you: do you believe in LKsdf'SAdflsi VI? Your response isn't "I don't have a position on the topic", you search your memory for "things you believe in" and you don't find "LKsdf'SAdflsi VI" and honestly answer: no, I don't believe in LKsdf'SAdflsi VI. > This is why calling a baby an atheist really doesn't make sense. Implicit atheism - check it out. Atheism implies all gods. This is different from two thousand years ago when Christians were called atheists which meant they don't believe in the particular God. I think it's silly to call Christians atheists now because the definition has changed from one particular God to all Gods. > babies don't take a position on the existence of god, and thus cannot be atheists. Atheism: lack of belief in Gods. Do babies believe in God? No. Therefore, atheists. You cannot not have a position on belief. You MUST either believe or not believe. You cannot semi-believe. > atheists -that is, people who believe no gods exist We have a problem with definition. "people who believe no gods exist" are gnostic atheists and, yes, babies are not that. Neither are vast majority of atheists. If you're one of those "agnostic atheism means nothing, you should call yourself an agnostic" then fine, that's your issue with the definitions. Considering you can be an agnostic theist, I find the label "agnostic" ambiguous. > there is no reason to claim that one believes, but doesn't know that god doesn't exist. Yes there is - there are atheists out there that DO know that God doesn't exist. > there is no reason to proclaim, "I believe, but I don't know." Actually, all hypotheses are exactly this. People have a hunch but they don't know... so they run the experiment to know. However, you're right, science has nothing to do with atheism. > It's disingenuous to claim to be an agnostic when you know for a fact that you are gnostic about some (in fact, most- once you realize how "knowledge" is actually defined) god-claims. In the context of someone living in the US, when the term "God" is used, it's typically referred to the Abrahamic God rather than, say, Thor. I do not have proof for or against the existence of the Abrahamic God. Therefore: I don't know. > But "god" as a non-empirical "entity" (for lack of better words) has always been known throughout the ages Nope. At best, it was "gods" - monotheism is a relatively new idea, at worst it was animism. Wind blowing, 250,000 years ago? Why that's the Wolf Spirit howling. Animism later merged into gods. > We've refined our concept of god over time Yes, we removed most of things attributed to this God to other things. This continued shrinkage of the power of God is worrying. Will God eventually be stuffed into the time before the Big Bang, with everything else explained? > you also have no proof that the theory of gravity is true Yes I do. I can prove it through a scientific experiment which is testable, repeatable, and has predictive properties. If your point eventually leads to solipsism then I do not care about this line of philosophical thought. > there should be physical evidence Have we excavated absolutely everything on Earth? No more discoveries? This also assumes that the horn is a bone. What if it's flesh or even cartilage? > there is absolutely no logical reason he cannot intervene Christians would disagree with you. > the problem of evil shows that this god doesn't exist, logically speaking. I have no problem with the problem of evil. I believe evil must logically exist. > we already know that that god doesn't exist News to me. You have proof because I don't. > Wasting our time with such inane conceptions of god is a pointless Sure but considering people who believe in Gods change laws... it kind of affects me personally. I'm going to reply to the other post because this is already huge! > One exists (in theory), one doesn't I don't care about theories, just reality. I'm OK with "theory" Gods but that's not the type of Gods who people use to change our reality. > there are plenty of reasons to believe in things we can't directly perceive But quarks, etc, all make themselves known. It's possible that we don't have the instruments yet to detect God. We could one day, I don't know. > as well as mathematical objects I'm not a math guy but either mathematical objects describe reality (ex: Pi) or it's something way beyond me but I don't believe something like that is where gods would hide. It's certainly not in their nature based on the descriptions in various holy texts. > Belief means one thinks something is true... Nailed that whole paragraph right on the head. > when it comes to the sciences, you realize that objective, peer-reviewed ... Sure but note that it doesn't affect my life. I'd care a lot more if their conclusions were that SsurebreC is to blame and he must be killed. Big Bang, evolution, climate change, etc, are pretty much irrelevant to me in my daily life. This is unlike religious claims of Gods where, if they were true, I need to drastically change my life right now. > it is clear to me that you didn't mean this latter sense Just a tip... I'm obviously not a philosopher, a scientist, or even much of a debater. Take it easy on me - you clearly could be writing books and giving lectures on this stuff, if you don't already. > idea that knowledge ... is like a product of an animal Well crap, I thought it was my idea. I'll look into him, though I will say that philosophy isn't a hobby of mine. > You seem very smart Nah, this type of a discussion just isn't my thing. I've also been distracted by the real world so on one hand, I'm eating this up, but on the other hand, I have other things on my mind. > nothing is "proven" in science The difference is that philosophy - as I know it - has ideas but there are no real wrong ideas. Science has plenty of wrong ideas. The testability, reliability, and predictability of scientific experiments gives me confidence that it is true enough. For some things, like gravity, we can prove it through repeated experiments. For other things, like Big Bang or abiogenesis, it's possible we can't ever prove it. To me, anyway. > you can ONLY prove ...things via logic or math There is some high-level math that I think is out there as far as its ability to prove anything. Logic however is tricky, you can get into trouble with unproven axioms. [SEP] Actually, all hypotheses are exactly this. People have a hunch but they don't know... so they run the experiment to know. However, you're right, science has nothing to do with atheism.
+> Okay, fuck it, I'll just continue working with a hernia until I'm 65 strictly because libertarians take ideological issue with the notion of communal empathy. No they take an issue with using force in executing such empathy. You assume that not wanting force people to do X=not wanting people to do X. > So where's that 90 thousand now? Never went to a hospital once. Insurance is about amortizing risk over a long period of time. > Maybe I'm not smart enough to figure out how but I'm certainly sensible enough to know that we can afford healthcare for everyone. The how is the most important part. Not all proposals for how will be affordable. I'm fully willing to discuss the merits and flaws of a given proposal or set of them. My response was primarily addressing the idea that the increase in cost for a medicare-for-all proposal would be trivial. >Anyway, sorry for the rant. Bad day on this end. Write me back after you've watched the video. And don't gloat when your side wins.... Cheers! I don't like to see debates as winning and losing. Debates should be about subjecting your views to scrutiny and refining it, and at least one but hopefully both parties coming out with a better understanding and better arguments, even if they don't change their ultimate conclusion. [SEP] I fear you might misunderstand how insurance works.
+A better word would be "women" in any case. , but I've heard people say "females" plenty of times. I will admit that with the rise of the alt-right and their association with the RedPill/Niceguys/Neckbeards^TM this word is getting noticed more in that group. That's all I was trying to point out, that the word is used by a group of undesirable people. [SEP] I've never heard anyone personally use the word "males" in place of men
+> If you haven't heard of it, then you lack a position on the topic. That's pretty simple. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. When you haven't heard of something, you don't believe in it. If I were to ask you: do you believe in LKsdf'SAdflsi VI? Your response isn't "I don't have a position on the topic", you search your memory for "things you believe in" and you don't find "LKsdf'SAdflsi VI" and honestly answer: no, I don't believe in LKsdf'SAdflsi VI. > This is why calling a baby an atheist really doesn't make sense. Implicit atheism - check it out. Atheism implies all gods. This is different from two thousand years ago when Christians were called atheists which meant they don't believe in the particular God. I think it's silly to call Christians atheists now because the definition has changed from one particular God to all Gods. > babies don't take a position on the existence of god, and thus cannot be atheists. Atheism: lack of belief in Gods. Do babies believe in God? No. Therefore, atheists. You cannot not have a position on belief. You MUST either believe or not believe. You cannot semi-believe. > atheists -that is, people who believe no gods exist We have a problem with definition. "people who believe no gods exist" are gnostic atheists and, yes, babies are not that. Neither are vast majority of atheists. If you're one of those "agnostic atheism means nothing, you should call yourself an agnostic" then fine, that's your issue with the definitions. Considering you can be an agnostic theist, I find the label "agnostic" ambiguous. > there is no reason to claim that one believes, but doesn't know that god doesn't exist. Yes there is - there are atheists out there that DO know that God doesn't exist. > there is no reason to proclaim, "I believe, but I don't know." > It's disingenuous to claim to be an agnostic when you know for a fact that you are gnostic about some (in fact, most- once you realize how "knowledge" is actually defined) god-claims. In the context of someone living in the US, when the term "God" is used, it's typically referred to the Abrahamic God rather than, say, Thor. I do not have proof for or against the existence of the Abrahamic God. Therefore: I don't know. > But "god" as a non-empirical "entity" (for lack of better words) has always been known throughout the ages Nope. At best, it was "gods" - monotheism is a relatively new idea, at worst it was animism. Wind blowing, 250,000 years ago? Why that's the Wolf Spirit howling. Animism later merged into gods. > We've refined our concept of god over time Yes, we removed most of things attributed to this God to other things. This continued shrinkage of the power of God is worrying. Will God eventually be stuffed into the time before the Big Bang, with everything else explained? > you also have no proof that the theory of gravity is true Yes I do. I can prove it through a scientific experiment which is testable, repeatable, and has predictive properties. If your point eventually leads to solipsism then I do not care about this line of philosophical thought. > there should be physical evidence Have we excavated absolutely everything on Earth? No more discoveries? This also assumes that the horn is a bone. What if it's flesh or even cartilage? > there is absolutely no logical reason he cannot intervene Christians would disagree with you. > the problem of evil shows that this god doesn't exist, logically speaking. I have no problem with the problem of evil. I believe evil must logically exist. > we already know that that god doesn't exist News to me. You have proof because I don't. > Wasting our time with such inane conceptions of god is a pointless Sure but considering people who believe in Gods change laws... it kind of affects me personally. I'm going to reply to the other post because this is already huge! > One exists (in theory), one doesn't I don't care about theories, just reality. I'm OK with "theory" Gods but that's not the type of Gods who people use to change our reality. > there are plenty of reasons to believe in things we can't directly perceive But quarks, etc, all make themselves known. It's possible that we don't have the instruments yet to detect God. We could one day, I don't know. > as well as mathematical objects I'm not a math guy but either mathematical objects describe reality (ex: Pi) or it's something way beyond me but I don't believe something like that is where gods would hide. It's certainly not in their nature based on the descriptions in various holy texts. > Belief means one thinks something is true... Nailed that whole paragraph right on the head. > when it comes to the sciences, you realize that objective, peer-reviewed ... Sure but note that it doesn't affect my life. I'd care a lot more if their conclusions were that SsurebreC is to blame and he must be killed. Big Bang, evolution, climate change, etc, are pretty much irrelevant to me in my daily life. This is unlike religious claims of Gods where, if they were true, I need to drastically change my life right now. > it is clear to me that you didn't mean this latter sense Just a tip... I'm obviously not a philosopher, a scientist, or even much of a debater. Take it easy on me - you clearly could be writing books and giving lectures on this stuff, if you don't already. > idea that knowledge ... is like a product of an animal Well crap, I thought it was my idea. I'll look into him, though I will say that philosophy isn't a hobby of mine. > You seem very smart Nah, this type of a discussion just isn't my thing. I've also been distracted by the real world so on one hand, I'm eating this up, but on the other hand, I have other things on my mind. > nothing is "proven" in science The difference is that philosophy - as I know it - has ideas but there are no real wrong ideas. Science has plenty of wrong ideas. The testability, reliability, and predictability of scientific experiments gives me confidence that it is true enough. For some things, like gravity, we can prove it through repeated experiments. For other things, like Big Bang or abiogenesis, it's possible we can't ever prove it. To me, anyway. > you can ONLY prove ...things via logic or math There is some high-level math that I think is out there as far as its ability to prove anything. Logic however is tricky, you can get into trouble with unproven axioms. [SEP] Actually, all hypotheses are exactly this. People have a hunch but they don't know... so they run the experiment to know. However, you're right, science has nothing to do with atheism.
 What? So geographic proximity and financial means are the only criteria that determine accountability? Bill Gates is capable of providing every homeless person in Seattle with a home and certainly has the means, does that mean no one should give any homeless in Seattle money because Bill Gates could take of it and he already lives there? Our values are better than those of UAE and Saudi Arabia and I don't want them to be the barometers of our moral obligations and I am pretty sure you don't either. Others shirking their responsibilities doesn't justify us doing the same. Plenty of countries are doing significantly more than we are and the top 10 refugee hosting countries in the world are not in the west. Turkey and Lebanon have taken over a million refugees each in a conflict that we are at least in part to blame. You have no idea what I do and what level of personal accountability I exhibit. As it happens I do lend my time and money to numerous causes including refugee and asylum organizations. Plus I pay taxes so I get to voice my opinion on how the government is run whether or not you agree with it. Virtue signalling is a term dumb people use when they get called out on their bullshit and really doesn't mean anything. A lightening quick glance at you post history shows you are and undergraduate student so I can't even really get that frustrated. You have almost certainly lived your whole life in a nice protected little bubble and never really had to work with other people and likely haven't seen enough of the world to realize it is not as black and white as you want it to be. I have been talking down to you and being an ass but it is only because I find your opinion morally repugnant and whats worse not terribly well thought out. That is not the attacking you. And no I won't get off my high horse.. Edit: And to the whole ignorance is bliss comment, please do enlighten with your worldly knowledge Mr. ASU undergrad. I have been all over the world doing the work I do and have had long meaningful relationships with people in some of the countries included in that ban. Yep I know this is an appeal to authority fallacy but I don't care. You are nothing but a pissed off, entitled, whiny brat who doesn't know jack shit about the world and hasn't contributed fuck all to it but somehow thinks you are owed something and that you know shit. [SEP] I have been talking down to you and being an ass because I find your opinion morally repugnant and whats worse not terribly well thought out.
-He said he didn't know most of the facts, implying he was writing from a barely informed (ignorant) view. While we don't know if the facts he know are in addition to what has been in the news as of late, I believe even OP would say he is not "clearly informed." You wrote about illegal settlements while talking about the Arab-Israel conflict as a whole, implying you feel the entire nation is illegal. The conflict dates back over a century, illegal settlements on yje occupied lands are only part of it. Adult tip: Don't flip out because your communication skills are poor. When that happens in the real world you find yourself out of a job real quick. Better to clarify what you meant to say. EDIT: And don't curse, very immature [SEP] You wrote about illegal settlements while talking about the Arab-Israel conflict as a whole, implying you feel the entire nation is illegal.
-1 & 2) It was a question, but an educated guess. Even if not true for you, it's true for most people reading. > there are alternatives to factory farming, people just don't use them 3) Right, so we agree. No need to be derogatory or treat me as "one of you people". Don't worry, you'll win the vote-war in any case. People hate uncomfortable truths. [SEP] People hate uncomfortable truths.
-"I don't have any real arguments so I'm just gonna act like I'm cool" Ok bro. This is not a conspiracy, this is what suits working in those companies spend half a day figuring out, cause it's their job. There's a whole science around products in the supermarket, where they're positioned, next to what, how close to exit, what music is playing, which product is discounted etc... All to maximize profit. If you think gaming companies are above doing something similar you're living under teenage delusion. [SEP] This is not a conspiracy, this is what suits working in those companies spend half a day figuring out, cause it's their job. There's a whole science around products in the supermarket, where they're positioned, next to what, how close to exit, what music is playing, which product is discounted etc... All to maximize profit.
-I know where its from, and that why I know he is implying our lobbying is fine compared to some other lobbies. Do I really need to think for you or you're fine by yourself? [SEP] Do I really need to think for you or you're fine by yourself?
-> somehow magically mean my real experiences with your cult didn't happen. Alright, so, we've established the truth here, finally. You're mad because someone who claimed to be Christian hurt you. Maybe it was one person, maybe it was an entire denomination -- I don't know. But I do know that this explains why you're so bitter. Again, I'm sorry for whatever abuse happened or how you were treated. You deserved better. > Christians... have ALWAYS been a net negative No, they haven't? The Catholic Church preserved the knowledge of the Western World after Rome fell. It built the first Hospitals, and remains the world's largest charity organization. The Church, the Christian faith (and indeed, most all religious Faiths) are forces for good in the world. [SEP] But I do know that this explains why you're so bitter.
-Second person who called me biased for no apparent reason. And my "statement presented as fact" was me paraphrasing the comment before me. He literally empirically proved my "asinine statement" true. Your comment however, has inaccuracies. Big ones. In gw2 if you get your gear, you are set. Permanently. You won't need a gear upgrade. Ever. I can come back in one year and my chars will still be geared and viable for raids and fractals. For WoW that's not true. I enjoy wow sometimes, but never for it's structured content and vertical gear progression system. That's what I don't like. [SEP] Second person who called me biased for no apparent reason.
-Math kind of works the same all over the world. If there's an error in my math feel free to point it out. [SEP] Math kind of works the same all over the world
-> Maybe what you were arguing was that you need a good CPU in order to fully utilize a high-end GPU and that the bottleneck will occur there. But that was never clear in both of your comments. Well, yes, that's how it works. Progress! Most gamers with mainstream systems will never run into a CPU bottleneck, their GPUs are the limiting factor in any game. That used to be common knowledge around this sub even a few months ago. CPU bottlenecks haven't been an issue with modern games for quite a while (at least for single GPU systems) and only have become more widespread sine the release of the GTX 980 Ti - which now means 1070 and higher, which is starting to affect the mainstream. Not that it should be necessary to explain that in a thread about the GTX 1080. 'Guess it is ... Or the "144fps gaming" in the title could have given it away, at least ... Or the fact that I quite explicitly mentioned a range of 100 to 125 FPS, which isn't something you reach with any midrange card. Just for comparison: your GTX 960 or its current equivalent, the GTX 1050 Ti, would typically reach around 50 FPS in AAA games at 1080p and Very High'ish settings. Miles away from any CPU bottleneck. > The most recent AAA title I played is Witcher 3 but I'm still not bottlenecked by my CPU. Witcher 3 is indeed an AAA title, and one of the better benchmarks for CPU limitations when doing the Novigrad runs - the huge amount of buildings, objects and NPCs take a huge toll on CPU performance. Your 960 though isn't anywhere close to fast enough to show that effect, it would still be the bottleneck if combined with weak CPUs like AMD's FX and Phenom II or Intel's Nehalem (first generation of Core iX), you'd have to go back to first gen Phenoms or low-clocked Core2Duo/Quad CPUs. Oh, and ... Overwatch actually is a title that can start running into CPU bottlenecks, but typically that won't happen below 160 to 200 FPS on modern systems, it's the push towards the 300 FPS limit that requires a mid- or high-end CPU (mid-end = high-end of mainstream, read that as i7 4770k, 4790k, 6700k and 7700k, high-end = absolute high-end, like the i7 5960X, 6900K, 6950X and 7820X and any i9) along with a low-latency RAM configuration. All of that becomes important when using a GTX 1070 or 1080 at 1080p and starts to be an issue with the GTX 1080 Ti at 1440p. (And technically AMD's Fury and Vega cards at 1080p, but these have additional problems that limits scaling). >Wow. Sorry for ruining the whole subreddit with my ONE comment. Hold on, let me report my own comment. Why are you so angry? Who the fuck hurt you? No, your ONE comment isn't ruining the subreddit, and I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you actually know that you're on a ridiculous strawman argument here and just use hyberbole for entertainment value. In fact, you actually wrote a reply instead of just downvoting, which puts you miles ahead of the rest of the mob. Which is why I'm actually giving it a try to explain to you what's the problem. But your presence in this discussion is indeed a problem, or rather, a symptom of a bigger problem. Now, I get where you're probably coming from - this subreddit has a history of being a helpful resource, you likely got help here at some time or other and now you feel like you should repay that by offering your experiences to others. And of course the very human instinct of belonging to something, in this case the Tribe of PC Builders. Great, very understandable. But unfortunately not helpful at all. Voices like yours are far more numerous now than actual expert voices, and to the point that expert voices are now the outliers and getting treated as such. And as a result, qualified comments get even rarer while like/dislike feedback (which btw is NOT what the upvote and downvote buttons are for) create an echo chamber effect for populist opinions. You are part of the problem. Which is again part of a much greater problem, that's affecting every single facet of our civilization that's being touched and transformed by modern internet culture and that experts have been warning about since "Web 2.0" became a buzzword. Yes, I'm quite frustrated about this whole issue, and it might actually show in the tone of my posts. Sorry about that, not sorry, actually. Yes, it wouldn't really change much if you alone become aware of what you're doing and changed your behavior. But: since you were the one person to actually engage in discussion, I'm going to address you as proxy for everyone like you, for the whole class of netizens you represent, who might still read this and also get an opportunity to reflect about this. I'm NOT blaming you personally. Most likely, you're actually trying to help - you just don't have the expertise necessary to understand that you're actually hurting your own interests instead. [SEP] Well, yes, that's how it works. Progress!
-Can you people who are under 35 kindly register and VOTE? Would it kill you? And spare me that "Aww but both parties are the saaaaame" lazy nonsense. [SEP] And spare me that "Aww but both parties are the saaaaame" lazy nonsense.
-I knew you are my number 1 fan, but now you want to do artistic painting of me? I'm flattered but I don't need a stalker. Listen Twwwy, I think you're a bitter douche who has no luck with women. You never agree with me and I'll never agree with you. So why don't you stop talking to me and both save us some time ? :) [SEP] Listen Twwwy, I think you're a bitter douche who has no luck with women. You never agree with me and I'll never agree with you.
-Passive aggressive? Ok, I'll stop trying to be tactful and constructive. Your music is cliche and derivative. It has been done to death since the mid 1990s. You are offering nothing new, or interesting. Over-production is not a replacement for creativity. Your synths already sound dated. This is why I never listen to tracks in this forum. Why did I start now? Oh yes, you promised me 'non-oontz music'. And then you started trashing people who bothered to listen to it who didn't lick your arse. [SEP] Passive aggressive? Ok, I'll stop trying to be tactful and constructive.
+He said he didn't know most of the facts, implying he was writing from a barely informed (ignorant) view. While we don't know if the facts he know are in addition to what has been in the news as of late, I believe even OP would say he is not "clearly informed." The conflict dates back over a century, illegal settlements on yje occupied lands are only part of it. Adult tip: Don't flip out because your communication skills are poor. When that happens in the real world you find yourself out of a job real quick. Better to clarify what you meant to say. EDIT: And don't curse, very immature [SEP] You wrote about illegal settlements while talking about the Arab-Israel conflict as a whole, implying you feel the entire nation is illegal.
+1 & 2) It was a question, but an educated guess. Even if not true for you, it's true for most people reading. > there are alternatives to factory farming, people just don't use them 3) Right, so we agree. No need to be derogatory or treat me as "one of you people". Don't worry, you'll win the vote-war in any case. [SEP] People hate uncomfortable truths.
+"I don't have any real arguments so I'm just gonna act like I'm cool" Ok bro. If you think gaming companies are above doing something similar you're living under teenage delusion. [SEP] This is not a conspiracy, this is what suits working in those companies spend half a day figuring out, cause it's their job. There's a whole science around products in the supermarket, where they're positioned, next to what, how close to exit, what music is playing, which product is discounted etc... All to maximize profit.
+I know where its from, and that why I know he is implying our lobbying is fine compared to some other lobbies. [SEP] Do I really need to think for you or you're fine by yourself?
+> somehow magically mean my real experiences with your cult didn't happen. Alright, so, we've established the truth here, finally. You're mad because someone who claimed to be Christian hurt you. Maybe it was one person, maybe it was an entire denomination -- I don't know. Again, I'm sorry for whatever abuse happened or how you were treated. You deserved better. > Christians... have ALWAYS been a net negative No, they haven't? The Catholic Church preserved the knowledge of the Western World after Rome fell. It built the first Hospitals, and remains the world's largest charity organization. The Church, the Christian faith (and indeed, most all religious Faiths) are forces for good in the world. [SEP] But I do know that this explains why you're so bitter.
+And my "statement presented as fact" was me paraphrasing the comment before me. He literally empirically proved my "asinine statement" true. Your comment however, has inaccuracies. Big ones. In gw2 if you get your gear, you are set. Permanently. You won't need a gear upgrade. Ever. I can come back in one year and my chars will still be geared and viable for raids and fractals. For WoW that's not true. I enjoy wow sometimes, but never for it's structured content and vertical gear progression system. That's what I don't like. [SEP] Second person who called me biased for no apparent reason.
+. If there's an error in my math feel free to point it out. [SEP] Math kind of works the same all over the world
+> Maybe what you were arguing was that you need a good CPU in order to fully utilize a high-end GPU and that the bottleneck will occur there. But that was never clear in both of your comments. Most gamers with mainstream systems will never run into a CPU bottleneck, their GPUs are the limiting factor in any game. That used to be common knowledge around this sub even a few months ago. CPU bottlenecks haven't been an issue with modern games for quite a while (at least for single GPU systems) and only have become more widespread sine the release of the GTX 980 Ti - which now means 1070 and higher, which is starting to affect the mainstream. Not that it should be necessary to explain that in a thread about the GTX 1080. 'Guess it is ... Or the "144fps gaming" in the title could have given it away, at least ... Or the fact that I quite explicitly mentioned a range of 100 to 125 FPS, which isn't something you reach with any midrange card. Just for comparison: your GTX 960 or its current equivalent, the GTX 1050 Ti, would typically reach around 50 FPS in AAA games at 1080p and Very High'ish settings. Miles away from any CPU bottleneck. > The most recent AAA title I played is Witcher 3 but I'm still not bottlenecked by my CPU. Witcher 3 is indeed an AAA title, and one of the better benchmarks for CPU limitations when doing the Novigrad runs - the huge amount of buildings, objects and NPCs take a huge toll on CPU performance. Your 960 though isn't anywhere close to fast enough to show that effect, it would still be the bottleneck if combined with weak CPUs like AMD's FX and Phenom II or Intel's Nehalem (first generation of Core iX), you'd have to go back to first gen Phenoms or low-clocked Core2Duo/Quad CPUs. Oh, and ... Overwatch actually is a title that can start running into CPU bottlenecks, but typically that won't happen below 160 to 200 FPS on modern systems, it's the push towards the 300 FPS limit that requires a mid- or high-end CPU (mid-end = high-end of mainstream, read that as i7 4770k, 4790k, 6700k and 7700k, high-end = absolute high-end, like the i7 5960X, 6900K, 6950X and 7820X and any i9) along with a low-latency RAM configuration. All of that becomes important when using a GTX 1070 or 1080 at 1080p and starts to be an issue with the GTX 1080 Ti at 1440p. (And technically AMD's Fury and Vega cards at 1080p, but these have additional problems that limits scaling). >Wow. Sorry for ruining the whole subreddit with my ONE comment. Hold on, let me report my own comment. Why are you so angry? Who the fuck hurt you? No, your ONE comment isn't ruining the subreddit, and I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you actually know that you're on a ridiculous strawman argument here and just use hyberbole for entertainment value. In fact, you actually wrote a reply instead of just downvoting, which puts you miles ahead of the rest of the mob. Which is why I'm actually giving it a try to explain to you what's the problem. But your presence in this discussion is indeed a problem, or rather, a symptom of a bigger problem. Now, I get where you're probably coming from - this subreddit has a history of being a helpful resource, you likely got help here at some time or other and now you feel like you should repay that by offering your experiences to others. And of course the very human instinct of belonging to something, in this case the Tribe of PC Builders. Great, very understandable. But unfortunately not helpful at all. Voices like yours are far more numerous now than actual expert voices, and to the point that expert voices are now the outliers and getting treated as such. And as a result, qualified comments get even rarer while like/dislike feedback (which btw is NOT what the upvote and downvote buttons are for) create an echo chamber effect for populist opinions. You are part of the problem. Which is again part of a much greater problem, that's affecting every single facet of our civilization that's being touched and transformed by modern internet culture and that experts have been warning about since "Web 2.0" became a buzzword. Yes, I'm quite frustrated about this whole issue, and it might actually show in the tone of my posts. Sorry about that, not sorry, actually. Yes, it wouldn't really change much if you alone become aware of what you're doing and changed your behavior. But: since you were the one person to actually engage in discussion, I'm going to address you as proxy for everyone like you, for the whole class of netizens you represent, who might still read this and also get an opportunity to reflect about this. I'm NOT blaming you personally. Most likely, you're actually trying to help - you just don't have the expertise necessary to understand that you're actually hurting your own interests instead. [SEP] Well, yes, that's how it works. Progress!
+Can you people who are under 35 kindly register and VOTE? Would it kill you? [SEP] And spare me that "Aww but both parties are the saaaaame" lazy nonsense.
+I knew you are my number 1 fan, but now you want to do artistic painting of me? I'm flattered but I don't need a stalker. So why don't you stop talking to me and both save us some time ? :) [SEP] Listen Twwwy, I think you're a bitter douche who has no luck with women. You never agree with me and I'll never agree with you.
+Your music is cliche and derivative. It has been done to death since the mid 1990s. You are offering nothing new, or interesting. Over-production is not a replacement for creativity. Your synths already sound dated. This is why I never listen to tracks in this forum. Why did I start now? Oh yes, you promised me 'non-oontz music'. And then you started trashing people who bothered to listen to it who didn't lick your arse. [SEP] Passive aggressive? Ok, I'll stop trying to be tactful and constructive.
 Yeah I've had to learn to stop myself from offering solutions because that's my first instinct but often not what people are looking for. But my mind is geared towards problem-solving so it's hard for me to listen to someone talk about issues or problems and not think through ways they could fix them. It's caused a lot of tension between me and my sister :/ [SEP] ... and not think through ways they could fix them.
-Yay, discourse is great fun! At the same time, keep in mind that this is a 10 minute video, not an in depth lecture on the intricate nature of the INTJ mind. Also keep in mind that all types utilize all functions. In fact, both Ni and Ne, as well as Te and Ti are strong functions for the INTJ (and ENTP respectively) what most people confuse this strength with, is the type's preference. I'm going to break down everything you're saying into sections and provide explanation or counter arguments for each. These "possibilities" may very well come from the INTJs ability to subconsciously use Ne, but I tend to disagree. The difference being, INTJs come to these "possibilities" in a very methodical and argumentative way (Ni + Te). The Ni's main superpower is it's random revelations or it's "AH - HA" moments. The ENTP on the other hand has a much more spontaneous way of coming up with possibilities. To them, they are whizzing by, and all the ENTP has to do is reach out and pluck one from the air. This is the key difference that a 10 minute video won't afford me the time to elaborate on. INTJs spend a great deal of time sifting through the various perspectives, exploring them very in depth (as is their forte). It takes longer and each different "possibility" is reached as a result of thinking through another. They rarely just jump to mind, it's like following a train of thought until you find yourself right next to another train. You then decide to follow that one, while keeping the other in mind, etc. Their ability to scrutinize specific technical aspects of something is most definitely NOT Ni - Se. Se is not concerned with this sort of data categorization in the slightest. It's only purpose for the INTJ is sensory input, in other words, absorbing the world around them in the rawest way possible. Imagine a camera taking a picture. There is no other purpose than to take that picture. The editing software on your computer is what colour corrects. Se is simply interested in experiences for the sake of experiences themselves. This is why INTJs can become addicted to drugs, alcohol or adrenaline inducing behaviours regardless of anything besides the experience. (Please, do not argue me using other functions in tandem with Se, OF COURSE other functions work along side it to produce addictive personality traits, such as Fi self loathing leading to alcoholism, etc.) Ti is only concerned with the rigidity of the structures it creates. Everything needs to be flawless like a professional engineer. When you argue with an INTP or an INTJ, they WILL argue semantics. The only way and INTJ can ensure you understand them is to make sure you are staying within the structural framework of the argument or discussion. Also known as - Ti! TA - DA! :D The point of the non-judgmental, J was to communicate that even though YES they do seem very judgmental, but most of the time they do not care. Elon Musk is a horrible example for this, because he is a business man through and through. He is not concerned with people's personal feeling in relation to their work ethic because it doesn't make him money. The point is, an INTJ (even Musk) does not give a flying fuck about your personal beliefs or values (note, not work ethic) because it does not AFFECT him in any way. Most INTJs are w5 and the runner up is w1, just for clarification. Regardless, as long as your personal behaviour is not getting in their way, then they do not care. Telling me that because my expectations are high, I must be a judgmental person is completely missing the point; and my Ti is screaming at me that we're not on the same page as far as 'judging' goes in regards to people. As I pointed out, IF an INTJ is old enough (usually by early 20s) to have any competency with Fi, then they do not judge in a negative, subjective way. There are two kinds of judging to an INTJ, and they are very different in application. As an example: Person A - Judges you based on your sexual orientation and is, as a result, mean. Person B - Judges you based on your aptitude at work in order to give you an objective (as they possibly can) performance review. Which do you think I mean when I say INTJs aren't judgmental? I'm beyond tired of typing ahaha, my hands are cramping. I think I got to the main points of what you said. Anything else, I hope you can infer based on the knowledge I have given you. Hopefully now you understand that I'm no novice at this and indeed "know my shit" pretty well. :p Thank you very much for your input! I think I'll do a video better explaining all of this. [SEP] The only way and INTJ can ensure you understand them is to make sure you are staying within the structural framework of the argument or discussion. Also known as - Ti! TA - DA! :D
-She is trying to but she gets easily overwhelmed, aside from taking meds, she’s trying to do more exercising and meditation and she used to see a therapist or someone of that nature, but now that she’s moved away from our hometown I don’t think she’s seeing anyone. She reads a lot of stuff online but I don’t think that necessarily helps, the other thing is that she has a big social media presence, something that I never cared for, but like most young folk these days this obviously has a negative affect on her mental health. [SEP] but like most young folk these days this obviously has a negative affect on her mental health.
-The advice here is basically not to make extreme decisions. It’s like the advise to never put ALL your holdings into Bitcoin. And btw “never sell ALL your bitcoin” is one of the oldest sayings in Bitcoin. And for good reasons as we all can see. [SEP] The advice here is basically not to make extreme decisions. It’s like the advise to never put ALL your holdings into Bitcoin.
-A smart consumer checks the product. Finds all the info he can get and pays for finished fully working product that he is sure he will be happy with. You on the other hand try to justify your need to get 2 free games. >You have no rhyme or reason to your opinion, no personal thought, you just heard about how bad it is that you've completely missed the actual point of not pre-ordering. Bioshock 1 is very old game that you can get for 5-10$. XCOM you can get on sale for 15$. If you are going to wait with playing Bioshock Infinite 3-4 months you will get it also much much cheaper. But if you preorder it and game comes out unplayable to some bug, it will turn out to be something completely different than you expected - You as consumer are the only one to blame. You did spend cash on unfinished product (Yes it is unfinished until you will be able to play it). Apparently your need to justify your choices just forces you to attack me personally not my opinions and this is the line I draw in discussions. So good day to you. Also if Bioshock or any other game that you preordered comes out to be total garbage blame yourself not developer. [SEP] Apparently your need to justify your choices just forces you to attack me personally not my opinions
-> Which joycon do you use, do you use all of them and send the audio signal to all of them, this would increase power usage and complicate matters, don't forget each joycon might be used by itself so if you only have it on one of them you will annoy people as well. What about volume, do you have different volumes for each joycon, how do you control it. First you're assuming I just meant Joy-Cons. The Pro could have certainly had a headphone jack. And also still your excuse for a headphone jack fails since it's not high power at all. You're not going to be sacrificing anything but space in the controller. The better argument is it would take up said space. That I can agree with. The pro controller could still have snuck one in. But still point is a simple bluetooth connection to the console would have been nice. > Its not out yet so we don't know this, but I'm going to assume only when online is correct as its a internet based service :P And thanks for answering that question. It was an exact counter to your argument. What does it matter if it's portable if I still need to be online with my Switch? So I would still need a wifi connection. Unless I tether to my phone or sit in something like a Starbucks, I can't exactly fire up a session with friends. Plus I don't think alot of people are going to go out to play multiplayer online games with their friends. They will most likely be home or even at their friends. Let's not act like portability was the problem here. Should read more carefully. > Because its not halfass its following current trends. It's future proof as well, no matter WHICH console you have you can all link in nicely. And what does it matter if you can link all consoles if you can't communicate with one another unless you are in the same game?? Like I said, the PlayStation app, no matter if someone is on a PS3 or PS4, I can still send them messages at the bare minimum. Your argument will only hold true if Nintendo decides to just allow party chat without the need of being in a game together across all platforms. It also doesn't make much sense seeing as this is Nintendo's only platform that utilizes it! > You realism one of the big 2 launched with no party chart right? Can't remember which one but it did. And you realize you're referring to PS3 right? A last gen console. That did not have party chat. Both the Xbox One and PS4 launched with party chat outside of games on day one. On PS4 it is a free service and can be up to 8 people. Xbox up to 15 but you need to be a gold subscriber. This just shows how ignorant people can be on this matter. Also how you try to mold things to fit your argument and defend Nintendo. This is not some current trend, this is Nintendo being out of touch with how people communicate when it comes to online gaming. P.S. I can just plug a standard pair of headphones into my controllers on those consoles, controlling both game and volume audio right from the dashboards. Can even do it while I'm game too. All you need is an inline mic and that would even do the trick. You can get as cheap with it or as fancy with it as you'd like. Amazing what options can do for you. Rather Impressive I'd say. [SEP] P.S. I can just plug a standard pair of headphones into my controllers on those consoles, controlling both game and volume audio right from the dashboards. Can even do it while I'm game too. All you need is an inline mic and that would even do the trick. You can get as cheap with it or as fancy with it as you'd like. Amazing what options can do for you. Rather Impressive I'd say.
-> I'm not sure what the point of your article is Something told me you'd be unable to figure out the point on the article. Kind of sad, actually, the humor in the article depends on an understanding of math and statistics, the sort of understanding one would think an engineer would have... Perhaps you should show the article to someone who knows a bit more math and stats than you do and have them explain it. [SEP] Perhaps you should show the article to someone who knows a bit more math and stats than you do and have them explain it.
-I am not from your culture or subcontinent. I don't have any liking or disliking for any culture, religion or anything from that part of the world. I understand people out there are little loose with words so I will not get into an insult war. And you are right it is about a foreign policy of a nation... geo-politics... which is about foreign policy and economics if you understand anything about history. Anywho, I was commenting on the gullibility and credulousness of folks like you from the subcontinent. Reminds me of a guy online who claimed Nicole Scherzinger is Indian and how she is now teaching Britain to sing ... apparently in reference to X Factor UK or Britain's Got Talent. [SEP] And you are right it is about a foreign policy of a nation... geo-politics... which is about foreign policy and economics if you understand anything about history.
-What does that mean, that it doesn't imply any cognitive association? Intuitively, it seems to indicate something about the types of concepts we are quickest to associate with one or the other. The study you linked has an interesting conclusion, to be sure, but I'm skeptical that police will act similarly in a lab, where they presumably never fear for their life, as to the streets where they might. This is used as the justification for any shooting so it seems important. I realize the irony in me making the exact critique of that study that was made against the IAT. [SEP] What does that mean, that it doesn't imply any cognitive association? Intuitively, it seems to indicate something about the types of concepts we are quickest to associate with one or the other.
-> She wasn't charged with laughing in a courtroom? No. She wasn't. She was charged with "disrupting Congress," something she clearly did. You need to stop reading fake news and clickbait. After a few months of following politics you'll figure out that just about everything from Huffington Post is clickbait and misleading. I understand it can be hard when you're brand new and come across politics on Reddit for the first time. Proof: http It's sad because she clearly has a mental health issue going on. [SEP] It's sad because she clearly has a mental health issue going on.
+Yay, discourse is great fun! At the same time, keep in mind that this is a 10 minute video, not an in depth lecture on the intricate nature of the INTJ mind. Also keep in mind that all types utilize all functions. In fact, both Ni and Ne, as well as Te and Ti are strong functions for the INTJ (and ENTP respectively) what most people confuse this strength with, is the type's preference. I'm going to break down everything you're saying into sections and provide explanation or counter arguments for each. These "possibilities" may very well come from the INTJs ability to subconsciously use Ne, but I tend to disagree. The difference being, INTJs come to these "possibilities" in a very methodical and argumentative way (Ni + Te). The Ni's main superpower is it's random revelations or it's "AH - HA" moments. The ENTP on the other hand has a much more spontaneous way of coming up with possibilities. To them, they are whizzing by, and all the ENTP has to do is reach out and pluck one from the air. This is the key difference that a 10 minute video won't afford me the time to elaborate on. INTJs spend a great deal of time sifting through the various perspectives, exploring them very in depth (as is their forte). It takes longer and each different "possibility" is reached as a result of thinking through another. They rarely just jump to mind, it's like following a train of thought until you find yourself right next to another train. You then decide to follow that one, while keeping the other in mind, etc. Their ability to scrutinize specific technical aspects of something is most definitely NOT Ni - Se. Se is not concerned with this sort of data categorization in the slightest. It's only purpose for the INTJ is sensory input, in other words, absorbing the world around them in the rawest way possible. Imagine a camera taking a picture. There is no other purpose than to take that picture. The editing software on your computer is what colour corrects. Se is simply interested in experiences for the sake of experiences themselves. This is why INTJs can become addicted to drugs, alcohol or adrenaline inducing behaviours regardless of anything besides the experience. (Please, do not argue me using other functions in tandem with Se, OF COURSE other functions work along side it to produce addictive personality traits, such as Fi self loathing leading to alcoholism, etc.) Ti is only concerned with the rigidity of the structures it creates. Everything needs to be flawless like a professional engineer. When you argue with an INTP or an INTJ, they WILL argue semantics. The point of the non-judgmental, J was to communicate that even though YES they do seem very judgmental, but most of the time they do not care. Elon Musk is a horrible example for this, because he is a business man through and through. He is not concerned with people's personal feeling in relation to their work ethic because it doesn't make him money. The point is, an INTJ (even Musk) does not give a flying fuck about your personal beliefs or values (note, not work ethic) because it does not AFFECT him in any way. Most INTJs are w5 and the runner up is w1, just for clarification. Regardless, as long as your personal behaviour is not getting in their way, then they do not care. Telling me that because my expectations are high, I must be a judgmental person is completely missing the point; and my Ti is screaming at me that we're not on the same page as far as 'judging' goes in regards to people. As I pointed out, IF an INTJ is old enough (usually by early 20s) to have any competency with Fi, then they do not judge in a negative, subjective way. There are two kinds of judging to an INTJ, and they are very different in application. As an example: Person A - Judges you based on your sexual orientation and is, as a result, mean. Person B - Judges you based on your aptitude at work in order to give you an objective (as they possibly can) performance review. Which do you think I mean when I say INTJs aren't judgmental? I'm beyond tired of typing ahaha, my hands are cramping. I think I got to the main points of what you said. Anything else, I hope you can infer based on the knowledge I have given you. Hopefully now you understand that I'm no novice at this and indeed "know my shit" pretty well. :p Thank you very much for your input! I think I'll do a video better explaining all of this. [SEP] The only way and INTJ can ensure you understand them is to make sure you are staying within the structural framework of the argument or discussion. Also known as - Ti! TA - DA! :D
+She is trying to but she gets easily overwhelmed, aside from taking meds, she’s trying to do more exercising and meditation and she used to see a therapist or someone of that nature, but now that she’s moved away from our hometown I don’t think she’s seeing anyone. She reads a lot of stuff online but I don’t think that necessarily helps, the other thing is that she has a big social media presence, something that I never cared for, [SEP] but like most young folk these days this obviously has a negative affect on her mental health.
+And btw “never sell ALL your bitcoin” is one of the oldest sayings in Bitcoin. And for good reasons as we all can see. [SEP] The advice here is basically not to make extreme decisions. It’s like the advise to never put ALL your holdings into Bitcoin.
+A smart consumer checks the product. Finds all the info he can get and pays for finished fully working product that he is sure he will be happy with. You on the other hand try to justify your need to get 2 free games. >You have no rhyme or reason to your opinion, no personal thought, you just heard about how bad it is that you've completely missed the actual point of not pre-ordering. Bioshock 1 is very old game that you can get for 5-10$. XCOM you can get on sale for 15$. If you are going to wait with playing Bioshock Infinite 3-4 months you will get it also much much cheaper. But if you preorder it and game comes out unplayable to some bug, it will turn out to be something completely different than you expected - You as consumer are the only one to blame. You did spend cash on unfinished product (Yes it is unfinished until you will be able to play it). and this is the line I draw in discussions. So good day to you. Also if Bioshock or any other game that you preordered comes out to be total garbage blame yourself not developer. [SEP] Apparently your need to justify your choices just forces you to attack me personally not my opinions
+> Which joycon do you use, do you use all of them and send the audio signal to all of them, this would increase power usage and complicate matters, don't forget each joycon might be used by itself so if you only have it on one of them you will annoy people as well. What about volume, do you have different volumes for each joycon, how do you control it. First you're assuming I just meant Joy-Cons. The Pro could have certainly had a headphone jack. And also still your excuse for a headphone jack fails since it's not high power at all. You're not going to be sacrificing anything but space in the controller. The better argument is it would take up said space. That I can agree with. The pro controller could still have snuck one in. But still point is a simple bluetooth connection to the console would have been nice. > Its not out yet so we don't know this, but I'm going to assume only when online is correct as its a internet based service :P And thanks for answering that question. It was an exact counter to your argument. What does it matter if it's portable if I still need to be online with my Switch? So I would still need a wifi connection. Unless I tether to my phone or sit in something like a Starbucks, I can't exactly fire up a session with friends. Plus I don't think alot of people are going to go out to play multiplayer online games with their friends. They will most likely be home or even at their friends. Let's not act like portability was the problem here. Should read more carefully. > Because its not halfass its following current trends. It's future proof as well, no matter WHICH console you have you can all link in nicely. And what does it matter if you can link all consoles if you can't communicate with one another unless you are in the same game?? Like I said, the PlayStation app, no matter if someone is on a PS3 or PS4, I can still send them messages at the bare minimum. Your argument will only hold true if Nintendo decides to just allow party chat without the need of being in a game together across all platforms. It also doesn't make much sense seeing as this is Nintendo's only platform that utilizes it! > You realism one of the big 2 launched with no party chart right? Can't remember which one but it did. And you realize you're referring to PS3 right? A last gen console. That did not have party chat. Both the Xbox One and PS4 launched with party chat outside of games on day one. On PS4 it is a free service and can be up to 8 people. Xbox up to 15 but you need to be a gold subscriber. This just shows how ignorant people can be on this matter. Also how you try to mold things to fit your argument and defend Nintendo. This is not some current trend, this is Nintendo being out of touch with how people communicate when it comes to online gaming. [SEP] P.S. I can just plug a standard pair of headphones into my controllers on those consoles, controlling both game and volume audio right from the dashboards. Can even do it while I'm game too. All you need is an inline mic and that would even do the trick. You can get as cheap with it or as fancy with it as you'd like. Amazing what options can do for you. Rather Impressive I'd say.
+> I'm not sure what the point of your article is Something told me you'd be unable to figure out the point on the article. Kind of sad, actually, the humor in the article depends on an understanding of math and statistics, the sort of understanding one would think an engineer would have... [SEP] Perhaps you should show the article to someone who knows a bit more math and stats than you do and have them explain it.
+I am not from your culture or subcontinent. I don't have any liking or disliking for any culture, religion or anything from that part of the world. I understand people out there are little loose with words so I will not get into an insult war. Anywho, I was commenting on the gullibility and credulousness of folks like you from the subcontinent. Reminds me of a guy online who claimed Nicole Scherzinger is Indian and how she is now teaching Britain to sing ... apparently in reference to X Factor UK or Britain's Got Talent. [SEP] And you are right it is about a foreign policy of a nation... geo-politics... which is about foreign policy and economics if you understand anything about history.
+The study you linked has an interesting conclusion, to be sure, but I'm skeptical that police will act similarly in a lab, where they presumably never fear for their life, as to the streets where they might. This is used as the justification for any shooting so it seems important. I realize the irony in me making the exact critique of that study that was made against the IAT. [SEP] What does that mean, that it doesn't imply any cognitive association? Intuitively, it seems to indicate something about the types of concepts we are quickest to associate with one or the other.
+> She wasn't charged with laughing in a courtroom? No. She wasn't. She was charged with "disrupting Congress," something she clearly did. You need to stop reading fake news and clickbait. After a few months of following politics you'll figure out that just about everything from Huffington Post is clickbait and misleading. I understand it can be hard when you're brand new and come across politics on Reddit for the first time. Proof: http [SEP] It's sad because she clearly has a mental health issue going on.
 TIL that US metropolitan areas count as "forests." In spite of the terrible headline, this is pretty pathetic. No surprise that it's occurring most heavily in the South where the scum wouldn't understand environmental regulation if it slapped them in the face. [SEP] in the south where the scum wouldn’t understand environmental regulation if it slapped them in the face
-Looks like your employers trying to squeeze every penny they can out of you, aren't they? In larger, more organized and successful companies, there are separate teams for all the automation because decoupling roles allows each team to specialize deeply in what they're supposed to be doing rather than stretching themselves thin. I'm willing to bet in companies where they force devs to be jack of all trades, the pipelines aren't as robust as they could be. That typically translates to lots of dollars and time lost. Do you guys have change management teams or is that something devs have to do too? [SEP] Looks like your employers trying to squeeze every penny they can out of you, aren't they?
-> I speak from experience of my own shitty choices in life. I think the problem is that you are using anecdotal evidence to make a quantitative argument. It's quite possible - especially from the tone of your rant - that your indictment of the higher education system is rooted in your own inability to find gainful employment. A stronger argument would be rooted in a careful analysis of the place of higher education in a modern (first world) society. A no point should you ever have to use the following words: ludicrous, unconscionable, pissed/pissing, "education" in quotes, worthless piece of paper (they are called diplomas), "generation of baristas," Those words should be replaced with phrases like "the amount we spend on higher education for the humanities is less than the economic output it generates [CITATION]. This statistic is alarming and causes one to consider changing the way we fund higher education in the humanities. Studies A and B [CITATION] show that if students begin working full time at age 18 instead of enrolling in a University to pursue a degree in the Humanities, they will be X% more like to be employed full time and will make Y% more annually...." [SEP] that your indictment of the higher education system is rooted in your own inability to find gainful employment.
->~~Switzerland Bi-Laterals is not possible in the short time-frame of transition.~~ Yes, they are. Easily so. Switzerland took decades to form all its EU based bilaterals because for the longest time they either had them on the backburner or didn't have a single entity to go through as they now do with the passing of Lisbon. >~~Acquis Communautaire would need to be repatriated for sifting and sorting entirely on exit to continue Single Market participation.~~ All Acquis would need to sifted and sorted on any exit to ascertain what is repealed. A point of misdirection. >~~MOST OF THE RULES are global in origin in any case:~~ Most of the regulations have a global origin. They tend to pick up a lot of luggage by passing through the EU middle-man. This isn't an "any case" point. That's the whole point of arguing for streamlining. Keeping gloabl trading but with a more competitive edge. >There's only x1 off-the-shelf package that allows this immediately which = EFTA/EEA. EEA is off the shelf as it doesn't provide for the simplest of requirements in providing the UK with permanent immigration controls. >~~The alternative Association Membership is a bitter pill to swallow because it's agreeing to Fiscal EUROLAND integration in return for staying IN the EU as second-class citizens; and effectively corralling the UK as per Andrew Duff:-~~ In only that Duff and Verhofstadt have offered a compromise with a new form of tailored association membership to run alongside other association agreements, but as your second point highlights "a long stay parking place". As federalists themselves are signalling that even as they need fiscal integration of 'Euroland', which the UK will not be a part of, they are keen to keep UK trade, then there's nothing wrong with an Association Agreement "parked outside the EU" within commuting distance of its single market. Sounds perfick. Outside the EU, with free movement of goods, capital, and services but not labour, with none of the political union. HANNAN'S SPOT ON. ^^[If ^^you ^^intend ^^to ^^respond, ^^and ^^would ^^like ^^a ^^response, ^^please ^^don't ^^write ^^in ^^broken ^^syntax ^^as ^^if ^^you're ^^writing ^^notes. ^^It ^^appears ^^fractured, ^^and ^^even ^^unhealthy.] [SEP] EEA is off the shelf as it doesn't provide for the simplest of requirements in providing the UK with permanent immigration controls.
-On this particular subreddit, if somebody is offended by certain comments, I take that into consideration when removing them. That's not at all pathetic when you consider that nobody really wants to read what a troll has to say about the OP, including the OP themselves. Think about that before you quickly judge a situation without knowing the context of what you're doing. -J [SEP] Think about that before you quickly judge a situation without knowing the context of what you're doing.
+In larger, more organized and successful companies, there are separate teams for all the automation because decoupling roles allows each team to specialize deeply in what they're supposed to be doing rather than stretching themselves thin. I'm willing to bet in companies where they force devs to be jack of all trades, the pipelines aren't as robust as they could be. That typically translates to lots of dollars and time lost. Do you guys have change management teams or is that something devs have to do too? [SEP] Looks like your employers trying to squeeze every penny they can out of you, aren't they?
+> I speak from experience of my own shitty choices in life. I think the problem is that you are using anecdotal evidence to make a quantitative argument. It's quite possible - especially from the tone of your rant - A stronger argument would be rooted in a careful analysis of the place of higher education in a modern (first world) society. A no point should you ever have to use the following words: ludicrous, unconscionable, pissed/pissing, "education" in quotes, worthless piece of paper (they are called diplomas), "generation of baristas," Those words should be replaced with phrases like "the amount we spend on higher education for the humanities is less than the economic output it generates [CITATION]. This statistic is alarming and causes one to consider changing the way we fund higher education in the humanities. Studies A and B [CITATION] show that if students begin working full time at age 18 instead of enrolling in a University to pursue a degree in the Humanities, they will be X% more like to be employed full time and will make Y% more annually...." [SEP] that your indictment of the higher education system is rooted in your own inability to find gainful employment.
+>~~Switzerland Bi-Laterals is not possible in the short time-frame of transition.~~ Yes, they are. Easily so. Switzerland took decades to form all its EU based bilaterals because for the longest time they either had them on the backburner or didn't have a single entity to go through as they now do with the passing of Lisbon. >~~Acquis Communautaire would need to be repatriated for sifting and sorting entirely on exit to continue Single Market participation.~~ All Acquis would need to sifted and sorted on any exit to ascertain what is repealed. A point of misdirection. >~~MOST OF THE RULES are global in origin in any case:~~ Most of the regulations have a global origin. They tend to pick up a lot of luggage by passing through the EU middle-man. This isn't an "any case" point. That's the whole point of arguing for streamlining. Keeping gloabl trading but with a more competitive edge. >There's only x1 off-the-shelf package that allows this immediately which = EFTA/EEA. >~~The alternative Association Membership is a bitter pill to swallow because it's agreeing to Fiscal EUROLAND integration in return for staying IN the EU as second-class citizens; and effectively corralling the UK as per Andrew Duff:-~~ In only that Duff and Verhofstadt have offered a compromise with a new form of tailored association membership to run alongside other association agreements, but as your second point highlights "a long stay parking place". As federalists themselves are signalling that even as they need fiscal integration of 'Euroland', which the UK will not be a part of, they are keen to keep UK trade, then there's nothing wrong with an Association Agreement "parked outside the EU" within commuting distance of its single market. Sounds perfick. Outside the EU, with free movement of goods, capital, and services but not labour, with none of the political union. HANNAN'S SPOT ON. ^^[If ^^you ^^intend ^^to ^^respond, ^^and ^^would ^^like ^^a ^^response, ^^please ^^don't ^^write ^^in ^^broken ^^syntax ^^as ^^if ^^you're ^^writing ^^notes. ^^It ^^appears ^^fractured, ^^and ^^even ^^unhealthy.] [SEP] EEA is off the shelf as it doesn't provide for the simplest of requirements in providing the UK with permanent immigration controls.
+On this particular subreddit, if somebody is offended by certain comments, I take that into consideration when removing them. That's not at all pathetic when you consider that nobody really wants to read what a troll has to say about the OP, including the OP themselves. -J [SEP] Think about that before you quickly judge a situation without knowing the context of what you're doing.
 You didn't even read my post i brought it up because they're both super hero movies, of course you're gonna compare wonder woman and spiderman, black panther and batman and so on. I never said vulture sucks, i said the fight sucks because its CGI jumbled non sense, I didn't go into detail just because there might be people here that haven't seen it yet. Honestly you sound like you never even watched the power rangers movie because nothing about the character development was 1 dimensional. Literally none of the character had anything close to the same struggle Honestly fans like you are why shit like megaforce happens. We honestly can't evolve further then horrible acting making half of us just look up the fights on youtube [SEP] Honestly fans like you...
-They sell a solid experience to people who don't know or care what's under the hood - and that's perfectly fine, because most people shouldn't need to know or care. The iPod was absolutely positively NOT revolutionary, though, in any way other than as a fashion icon. If you don't believe that then you didn't follow that technology even a tiny bit back then. The iPod did absolutely nothing new besides the "wheel", and quite frankly compared to the interface my Dell DJ had, the iPod's actually sucked! I won't protect or tout the goodness of Dell in very many situations, I normally think Dell stinks, but the DJ was much simpler to use than the iPod - especially creating "on the go playlists"... I'm not a mac hater. I grew up on the Apple 2, the Apple 2gs, the Mac Classic, the Mac 2ci, etc... Apple was my introduction into computing... As someone who has used both platforms extensively, I can tell you that the Mac provides me absolutely no compelling reasons to pay the price difference. [SEP] As someone who has used both platforms extensively, I can tell you that the Mac provides me absolutely no compelling reasons to pay the price difference.
-I am very familiar with the concept of p-zombies. Somewhat obscurely implied in my comment was my opinion that they are stupid. The whole concept of p-zombies is essentially part of a debate on eliminative materialism. But they beg the question (which is funny because if I recall they were first proposed by an anti-eliminativist). If eliminativism is false, then a zombie cannot be both indistinguishable from a human and lack subjective experience, because subjective experience informs certain aspects of human culture (for an obvious example, philosophy of mind). Then a zombie would never invent the hard problem, for sheer lack of relevant data. The only way around this would be to have zombies specially programmed to talk about subjective experience, basically a crude hack in their brains, which would obviously make them distinguishable from a human. TL;DR zombies are stupid. [SEP] I am very familiar with the concept of p-zombies.
-To be fair, the SDF only really got beefed up relatively recently to provide more muscle for the USA pacific block to counter the rise of China. The Japanese navy on the other hand, as far as I'm aware, has been a well equipped and powerful force for much longer. [SEP] the SDF only really got beefed up relatively recently
-The game has certainly changed since those teams really earned their "elite" status. I don't think it is a given that teams like Michigan, Texas and Penn State will be elite again. I think that of those teams, it is the most difficult for me to imagine Texas staying down forever. With the geographical and financial advantages that they have, it boggles the mind that they continue to struggle the way that they are. [SEP] I don't think it is a given that teams like Michigan, Texas and Penn State will be elite again.
-Your statistics re consitenly wrong and no sources are cited. You're a sheep. Go back to your heard. The fact of the matter still remains: No matter how much good it does for society, the coercive and non consensual taking of a persons property or money by another person or group of people is morally wrong. End of story. Don't they teach you that stealing is wrong where you live? [SEP] Your statistics re consitenly wrong and no sources are cited. You're a sheep. Go back to your heard.
-Moxie yes. Finesse is a big maybe. Support attacks use support power to determine damage, so unless your running assault abilities in your tank LAS finesse will do nothing for you. Edit: derp. Warrior. My bad. I was thinking engineer. [SEP] Edit: derp. Warrior. My bad. I was thinking engineer.
-I don't think this binary paradoxical conflict you describe is accurate. The big issues in all this are agency and power. In the past, the patriarchy (by which I mean a social power structure based on masculinity) prescribed the woman should cover up and be virginal creatures with no sexual agency. Then sexual "liberation" happened, but it really didn't liberate anyone from anything. Now the patriarchy just demands that women act and dress in a sexual manner and again removed their agency. So essentially all the paradox you mentioned aren't actually paradoxes in feminist thought but a grave misunderstanding thereof; the problem is the patriarchy is still in control, it just controls in different ways that give an illusion of liberation. [SEP] Now the patriarchy
-I don't understand how cops like this keep their jobs. [SEP] I don't understand how cops like this keep their jobs.
-God I hate the creeping backward trend. All stores used to open at Midnight, then someone made it 11, then someone else had to compete and opened at 10. Now some places don't even close and just "start" BF deals at 6 p.m. or something equally ridiculous. [SEP] Now some places don't even close and just "start" BF deals at 6 p.m. or something equally ridiculous.
->Martin Luther King, Jr. was never a registered Republican. Is there any actual hard evidence either way to support this? >This is a Republican myth based on the supposition by MLK's niece that he might have been a Republican because the southern Democratcs in the 1950s were so racist. Regardless of if he was or wasn't a republican, the video that I've seen of his niece didn't take the form of a supposition, but was stated as an outright fact. Now you can certainly take the stance that she was incorrect if you want, but we should at least honestly represent how she presented her claim. >However, MLK's own son categorically stated that he was never a Republican. So we believe the word of one family member, but not the word of another. That seems a little hypocritical... >The interesting thing is that all those seats held by racist Democrats in the 1950s are now firmly held by dog-whistle blowing racist Republicans. Now you are just making vicious, generalized accusations that I promise you don't have any evidence to support. You disagree? Then I challenge you to prove that every seat is now held by "dog-whistle blowing racist Republicans." Can you do that? Yeah I didn't think so. Now it is becoming clear that you are either a troll of someone whose mind is so poisoned by bias that your opinion is less than useless. >Just like stating that the "right to work for starvation wages" is somehow a good thing. Even more bullshit. Let's play a game. How about you tell me the total amount of people in the US that ACTUALLY starve to death in a year. Then tell me how many of those are deaths are caused by excessively low wages as opposed to parental neglect or mental retardation or clinical conditions. [SEP] How about you tell me the total amount of people in the US that ACTUALLY starve to death in a year.
-There is a couple of games with leap motion support and of course Rift will have Touch controllers in December. But i agree, Honey Select is the best there is but that doesnt mean its good. [SEP] There is a couple of games with leap motion support
-Orient the long board lengthwise from left to right so the plunge cuts are perpendicular to your body. Adjust the router to the desired depth of cut. Place a straight edge clamped to the board at the location you wish to place to dado cut, measured appropriately to allow for the distance from the centre of the router bit to the edge of the router base. I would not have used a router table for the leg placement at all. Side note: I have the exact same router and table as you. Do you ever find that the black piece in the centre of the table needs constant adjustments? [SEP] Do you ever find that the black piece in the centre of the table needs constant adjustments?
-I think so, yes. I wouldn't know how one can transition from a supinated palm grip (as in chin ups) to a muscle up. In fact, I think that's impossible. [SEP] I wouldn't know how one can transition from a supinated palm grip (as in chin ups) to a muscle up. In fact, I think that's impossible.
-Your live isn't based on statistics but on your own choices. The fact that males are traditionaly the sole earner doesnt mean your chances of being the stay at home parent are lower. The way your household manages income is only determined bij you and your SO. Furthermore going back to one earner making enough to support a family doesn't mean going back to the old gender roles. It also doesnt mean only one person per family is able to have a job. [SEP] Furthermore going back to one earner making enough to support a family doesn't mean going back to the old gender roles
-Yeah but neither of those launched with more than 1 or 2 colours,unlike the 64 with about 5 or 6 different ones I believe. The colours on the 64 controllers were more vibrant and caught the eye better too. Going to a mates house? 99% chance he has a black Xbox One controller. Going to a mates house in 1995? 20% chance he had a grey 64 controller. See where I'm coming from? [SEP] Going to a mates house in 1995? 20% chance he had a grey 64 controller.
-Violence isn't always morally wrong. The point of the argument is not to be opposed to every government policy. It's to hammer home the idea that laws are quite serious things which should not be passed frivolously, and that you consider this particular law so good and right that you are okay with violently forcing someone to obey it. [SEP] The point of the argument is not to be opposed to every government policy.
-Sorry, I wasn't raised that way. My mom is a certified first responder. We stop, for everything. She saved a pregnant woman who went into a diabetic coma while driving. She helped a little old man wandering around with bloody hands and no memory of anything. We always stop for accidents if there aren't emergency vehicles on scene yet, no matter where we're going. And I *did* step forward to help out a guy who had just been thrown around the corner from a fight. I've had the hero instinct kind of burned into me. I can't imagine having any reaction *but* to help people, because it's always been a part of who we are. And even if I were to panick in a momentary test, there's no way I would be able to walk past a rape, or any other crime, and not help, without *hating myself for the rest of my life*. Even if there were weaponry or a gang involved, I would at least call the police immediately and attempt to find someone who could help. [SEP] attempt to find someone who could help.
-Although I am a Keynesian and - it should go without saying - anti-austerity, I think we have to take Yanis Varoufakis' comments with a pinch of salt. I'm a fan of his economic views, but his political views seem pretty tainted of late. [SEP] Although I am a Keynesian and - it should go without saying - anti-austerity
-> However viewers would have been left with little to do but switch the kettle on this weekend as Netflix suffered an outage lasting nearly three hours. This was due to the release of the new Marvel series Luke Cage, I believe. Surges in power requirements are being replaced by surges in bandwidth as people binge of newly available shows. [SEP] This was due to the release of the new Marvel series Luke Cage, I believe.
-> it is comparable considering we are simply talking about good players on shit teams, so it's absolutely comparable lol. EU being relatively weaker than KR does not change that Rekkles had a useless team just like Faker did therefore he looked worse compared to other competition. Rekkles wasn't even the best player on Alliance... Faker is far and away the best player on SKT. >it is comparable considering we are simply talking about good players on shit teams, so it's absolutely comparable lol Not when the context makes the comparison null and void. [SEP] Rekkles wasn't even the best player on Alliance... Faker is far and away the best player on SKT.
-LA Galaxy, LAFC, San Jose, Sacramento, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Orlando, Atlanta, and Miami could all be available for home games in early December and February....maybe Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver as well. I really don't care if the season starts in July or February, but June needs to be taken off and the Gold Cup needs to be moved to June. Playing through the international absences for World Cup, Gold Cup, Copa Lib, and maybe the Euro Cup has to stop. The only way to do that is play more games in the winter. Every year a few teams could claim their season was ruined by international call-ups and those teams likely lose some fans. How much longer can it go on? How am I supposed to take the league seriously, when they don't even take themselves seriously by playing through these tournaments? [SEP] The only way to do that is play more games in the winter
-yeah my girlfriend broke up with me and said similar things about me. Part of the reason was "I wasn't texting her much" and "didn't seem like i cared much". This was why we she said broke up. There was a much more profound issue, but these are things that come up to the surface and serve as their 'complaints'. I'm not taking it too seriously, just looking at it as me not maintaining my frame properly and not handling a situation well enough. For those curious, she developed herpes 1 month into our relationship, and I handled it poorly and we broke because of it. She thought I was cheating and the relationship was not going to last past a month when an STD develops and little trust has been built and the guy handles it poorly. [SEP] She thought I was cheating and the relationship was not going to last past a month when an STD develops and little trust has been built and the guy handles it poorly.
-In a way, the Roman Empire didn't really split, and it is more useful to think of it as a singular entity with two different administrative structures after 395 CE. The emperors of the East and West were both related to each other and rendered each other aid. I would love to hear the answer to your other question. There was a Byzantine "renaissance" in the eleventh century that reemphasized classical learning of Christian, but that was almost more of a "Hellenic" revival than a Roman one. [SEP] The emperors of the East and West were both related to each other and rendered each other aid.
-Right, how could I forget about all that other stuff he's done. Like drive us into a depression and maintain Bush's absurd wars. [SEP] drive us into a depression
-Having driven in the UK this holiday I think it is a bit different to other countries when it comes to roundabouts, but nonetheless pretty easy to understand. The car obviously not only is at fault a 100% here, he also tries to get away after he hits the biker, which is far worse. [SEP] tries to get away
-What I got from it: 40-31 percent of the country seemingly would vote Republican no matter what. Even though 68% say they believe Trump has made unwanted sexual advances toward women, 40-31 percent of the country is seemingly perfectly OK with that. >.> [SEP] 40-31 percent of the country
-> No, consensual, casual sex is not damaging No it's not. You're right. However, the types that constantly engage in this behavior with different men tend to be already damaged, and the multiple partners she keeps getting with just solidifies these poor character traits that lead to these decisions. > And what about the men that sleep with them? If it's an actual slut? We try to keep it secret or just to our bros. We don't like to publicly announce we had to fuck a slut to fulfill our urges. Sluts aren't our prefferred fuck, but we'll do it if our options our limited. > I really dont get this whole "ill stick my dick in what lets me, but afterwards ill judge the shit out of them for it. Im really a nice guy though." contradiction. I actually have no problems with sluts. I'm just pointing out that I'd never date the type of personality that is a slut. I love sluts. They make last call at the bar really easy. > your double standards I'm sorry, but that's life. There are going to be double standards between the genders. Believe it or not, men and women are different beyond just a chromosome. Some double standards are unfair, and others make sense. I'm sorry you don't like the fact that men and women are different and have different expectations by society but there are. [SEP] had to fuck a slut
-The diameters do not vary across substance, but 10 gauge AWG might not be the same as 10 gauge MWG. It's just saying that the steel industry typically uses the gauge label that the wire is most likely going to be used for. It not like they would use gun gauges for copper wire... As long as you stick with a consistent gauge scale, 12 gauge wire should be the same no matter what it is made out of. [SEP] 10 gauge AWG might not be the same as 10 gauge MWG
-The issue that I have with carbon tax credits is they can be bought and sold (at least the version that I've read can be). If a company figures out that it's cheaper for them to pay for tax credits and pollute, then they will. If they are expensive than they may choose to do it illegally. Maybe if it was done in a way that would gradually pressure companies to innovate cleaner methods of doing things, it could be good, but then the company would patent whatever technology is used in it and that could have a wide array of different, unpredictable outcomes. [SEP] Maybe if it was done in a way that would gradually pressure companies to innovate cleaner methods of doing things, it could be good, but then the company would patent whatever technology is used in it and that could have a wide array of different, unpredictable outcomes.
-We are a subset of libertarians. The term is being hijacked. If you are worried about socialists hijacking and destroying our ideology then look at fabian society logo and step up your game really quick. No much time left for /r/Anarcho_Capitalism if they zergrush as this sub is gone. [SEP] We are a subset of libertarians. The term is being hijacked.
-The leagues were interesting but 2.0 was only interesting for new content, clear speed and build diversity was crushed in 2.0 which made the game much less interesting. I stopped playing about 2 weeks ago and just lurk on the forums looking for something enticing to tempt me back. [SEP] clear speed and build diversity was crushed
-I agree that the rules blatantly conflict, but messaging the mods for clarification is a much better response than running to /r/undelete and screaming CONSPIRACY. [SEP] messaging the mods for clarification is a much better response than running to /r/undelete and screaming CONSPIRACY
-How lame would it be if the way we discover aliens is due to some stars having a bit of a wiggle in their spectrum [SEP] How lame would it be if the way we discover aliens is due to some stars having a bit of a wiggle in their spectrum
-His special does 15K damage, it won't kill most teams. Even better than poison is the Dreadnaught ship that saves you one special animation and one crew slot. [SEP] His special does 15K damage, it won't kill most teams. Even better than poison is the Dreadnaught ship that saves you one special animation and one crew slot.
-Write for Business Insider? As for that Colonel; I honestly don't know what his thought process is - he says it's payload is low, yet at over 18,000lb its payload greater than any of the jets it replaces, he says it has a short range, yet it has a greater combat radius (>600nmi) than any of the jets it replaces, etc. Instead of linking to articles, why don't you go and do your own research and look at **empirical** data; learn what it means, what different metrics are used, learn how to convert apples-to-oranges comparisons to apples-to-apples, etc. [SEP] Instead of linking to articles, why don't you go and do your own research
-Anyone remember the May 21, 2011 Christians? Despite the fact that they were in the news for only about a month, the group had been around for over twenty years. I would know - I was raised in it. One of the horrible aspects of May 21st is that people were commanded to sell of their houses, quit their jobs, take their kids out of school, ect because continuing a normal instead of preparing for the rapture proved someone to be unsaved. I wouldn't know where to begin - my family knew several families that sold everything they owned and decided to live in cars and "spread the word." Almost everyone quit their jobs. I know one woman who drove a school bus. She handed out religious tracks to all of the elementary students on what she thought was her last day. It probably was on the account that parents probably rang the school up about the crazy pamphlets she was handing out and how it scared the students. There were also numerous divorces. One spouse would think the whole thing was crazy, pick up, and leave. One woman's husband took their child and left, and after the whole May 21st fiasco she still couldn't find them. I don't know if she ever has. There was a lot of discussion about what to do with pets - I know one man who put down his healthy dog. That really broke my heart. I remember crying over both my dog and cat, and not being able to sleep because of what God was supposedly going to do and how it was going to hurt my best friends. I asked God to just do it quickly. I didn't quit my job (my parents were not happy about that because it made it seem like I didn't have faith that the world was going to end), but I dropped out of school, and gave away ALL of my money to the group. There were few cases (at least that I know of) that involved people running up debt. Mostly because doing so "proved" someone was unsaved. I picked up after it all happened. I got two jobs to try and make up for the money I lost, I worked my ass off in community college and am now in the university of my dreams, and am trying to transition into a normal life. It's very difficult. I was raised in a cult and it's impossible to relate to people sometimes. Religiously, I couldn't be better. I am probably too cynical about religion, but I feel good going to bed each night, being an atheist. I feel so much better and life is looking up. I've dramatically changed. Everyone else varies though. There are plenty of people who are trying to figure out what happened and plan for the next date of the rapture. These people will ALWAYS be around. For the most part people are just trying to get by - get what jobs they can and take care of their kids. I know a lot of the younger people are relieved, and feel guilty to feel relieved. (Feeling relieved means that you didn't actually want it to happen, which means that you don't trust in God's will, which means you're unsaved and going to hell). I think I struggle less internally than most of the younger people I know. Most are trying to still be some sort of Christian and make some sort of life out of the mess. It's all very, very sad. Chances are though, it's the worse event that will happen (or not happen) in our lives. Whenever I'm having a shit day I try to remember that. EDIT: I should mention that I am not quite 100% better. Religiously speaking, I am better off than most of the other young people. Most of them are trying to reconcile and still believe in God or bits of the May 21st theory, ect while I'm religiously over all of it. But as far as my health mentally, socially, and even sexually I am.....not really all the way there. I'm working on it, but there's a lot of shit to work through after more than 20 years. That's one of the reasons I'm always trying to track down people who went through similar events that I did. I feel like we can relate to each other in ways that others don't quite get. Also, I can't really tell my new friends - this is a lot to throw on someone out of no where. It's a lot of baggage. I'm really the only one in my family who left, so it's a bit lonely, ya know? Also, not that important, but I'm a woman. [SEP] There was a lot of discussion about what to do with pets - I know one man who put down his healthy dog.
-BY minor League Attendance the A's should move to Sacramento. The Rays should move to either Charlotte, NC or Indianapolis IN. [SEP] The Rays should move to either Charlotte, NC or Indianapolis IN.
-And there is a reason people think of GDI's as pussies too. That doesn't mean I think of every GDI that way. [SEP] And there is a reason people think of GDI's as pussies too.
-But free trade with the rUK is a significant downgrade from what we would have as a member of the UK and will mean significant barriers to trade for over 60% of our exports and imports. Being in the UK's single market is pretty important for Scotland. Moreso than being in the EU's. Financial services (just under 15% of the UK's GDP and a similar proportion of the UK's tax revenue) is a whole load of different industries that are listed as one. We're seeing that now, as some are expected to take a hit from Brexit, whereas others are seeing record growth. Finance firms were the some of the largest donors to *both* the Remain and Leave side. This makes the industry a lot more diverse than one raw material. [SEP] Being in the UK's single market is pretty important for Scotland. Moreso than being in the EU's.
-Especially since Jojo and Rexxar got 25% nerfs to the exact same thing... [SEP] Especially since Jojo and Rexxar got 25% nerfs to the exact same thing...
-To be fair, it's come a long way. Most major distributions allow you to simply install a package and Graphics Drivers automagically work (Debian, Fedora, Arch). I remember 6/7 years ago having to hunt down the proper network adapter drivers. God damn, that was such a pain. Most hardware nowadays (<5 years old) should work out of the box. [SEP] network adapter drivers
->Supressing ideas because they cause bad feelings is retarded. It is pure censorship with weak reasoning. Suppressing women's sexuality because it causes men to feel insecure is retarded. It is pure selfishness with weak reasoning. >Tell me your number out of curiosity, are you ashamed? No, I'm not ashamed. I find it difficult to touch and be touched by new people, so I've had only two partners, both within LTRs. Have I been called a slut numerous times anyway for reasons not even relating to sex? Yeah. "Slut" and other terms like "whore" are used specifically on women to make them feel less valuable and worthwhile, even if they're not doing anything overtly sexual. I've been called a slut by girls I didn't even know, and by guys I turned down. A woman's sexual nature is usually the first thing someone attacks when they want to hurt her, and this is both a double-standard and a serious problem for young women who don't know how to defend themselves against it. It's a serious problem because slut-shaming causes bullying and social ostracization, depression, and in some cases even suicide. And it's all completely preventable, the only thing you have to do is not shame women for liking sex the way men like sex. We're human, we need to like sex to propagate the species. Women liking sex is not going to go away. [SEP] I find it difficult to touch and be touched by new people
-let yourself drift off.... its part of the process. no one will ever have an hour of total silence unless they have died. the human brain will constantly chatter away, yes it will get quieter and less frequent. embrace it! it means your meditating correctly. dont give in :) [SEP] no one will ever have an hour of total silence unless they have died.
->You refuse to accept the historical fact that extra-marital sex was widespread throughout human history I'm not accepting this because it's not an historical fact. Extra-marital sex happened, of course -- but "widespread"? What do you mean by "widespread"? Where is your evidence? >You rationalize your rejection by asserting that the only women who had sex outside of marriage were concubines. I never said this. >Reputable historical sources were cited Where? Telling me to look at /r/AskHistorians is not a "reputable historical source." >The point I have made over and over again, which you could not rebuke thus far, is the reality that what you call "casual sex" or "promiscuity" has been a persistent, ever-present part of human nature that was only briefly suppressed or driven into secrecy by Catholic dogma. 1. I'm not sure why the terms "casual sex" and "promiscuity" are in quotation marks: these are terms with clear meaning. 2. Attributing an opposition to casual sex exclusively to Catholicism is historically ignorant. What about the Jews? The Orthodox? The Muslims? All of the tribes across the globe who have practiced slut-shaming? 3. To return to the first point made in this response, it has not yet been demonstrated that casual sex was rampant in ancient societies. The risk of pregnancy was very real. Women were not yet treated as fully human. Promiscuous behavior was ubiquitously condemned, even in Roman society. What you're doing is what we in philosophy would understand as assertion-making rather than argument-making. >They are going to have sex no matter how hard people like you try to tell them not to in useless abstinence-only sex ed programs. Is there a single society in human history that has successfully discouraged young adults from having casual sex? (There are hundreds, but even *one* suffices to demonstrate my point.) Yes? Then it *is* possible to dissuade young adults from having casual sex. Your biological fatalism regarding promiscuity simply isn't backed by the historical record. Let me go over the three main claims I've made: 1. Birth control is far more reliable and available than it's been in the past. 2. Having casual sex in the past was a far riskier proposition than it is today. 3. Consequently from [1] and [2], people today are having far more sex than they did in the past. Feel free to address any of these points specifically. [SEP] Is there a single society in human history that has successfully discouraged young adults from having casual sex?
-Yes, *every single American, over 300 million people,* just sit on their asses. Fuck you. You know nothing about our country except for what you hear, and I'll tell you right now the only news that actually makes it is the bad. It gives an unfair view of the country. [SEP] It gives an unfair view of the country.
-I personally think that the reason Jones had much better success then Morris is because he is a good pass catching back too, whereas morris is not. Because of this, when defenses see Morris in the backfield they stack 8 in the box and assume it's a run (because once again, Morris can't catch a cold butt naked in Alaska), whereas when they see Jones in the backfield (who is an unproven rookie) they think pass. Even Washington's coach in the press conference mentioned this as the reason he mixed their carries. It is an attempt to keep defenses guessing. I am a fantasy owner of both and am scared because I am convinced they will both get split carries all season because 1. Morris is too good and consistent to be a backup, 2. even if Jones is better, Morris is not third down back material (because of his brick hands), which would make Jones a 3 down receiver which would mean Morris never playing, and 3. Jones is too good to just be a third down back. [SEP] 1. Morris is too good and consistent to be a backup, 2. even if Jones is better, Morris is not third down back material (because of his brick hands), which would make Jones a 3 down receiver which would mean Morris never playing, and 3. Jones is too good to just be a third down back.
-> The very thing you see as "civilized society" is inherently uncivilized I have civilized society in the associations I keep. I spent years building those associations. My interactions with government haven't been civilized, as government sees fit to act via coercion and deception. BTW, I see no difference between corporate and civil government anymore. They became the same thing in the 20th century. I prefer neighbors that act like neighbors. I don't care what other people call them. [SEP] I prefer neighbors that act like neighbors. I don't care what other people call them.
-We're pretty much normal guys. We get up, go to work, pay our bills, and respect other peoples opinions and beliefs. It's not bad here in Dallas. Most LGBT here are moderate leaning. [SEP] and respect other peoples opinions and beliefs.
-The dog: Fullmetal Alchemist (it's great) The catgirl: Asobi ni iku yo!, licensed as "Cat Planet Cuties" in the US (it's shit) The manga girl: Yotsuba&! (it's awesome) The crying kid: Pokemon (it's nostalgia) The guy with the sunglasses: I have no idea [SEP] Asobi ni iku yo!
-Yeah, because I dont have to. Theres a whole subreddit for talking about Eva. The truth is most people disagree with you. You're the only one out of the loop, and I dont feel responsible for explaining things to you. [SEP] The truth is most people disagree with you
-Canada is a mostly a christian/secular country with their own values and identity. It should not allow someone to become a canadian citizen if they do not follow these values and adopt a canadian identity. By doing so it is destroying the identity of canadians, dividing them based on values and making them into currency. Good talk about tribe and identity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7vGntRbFe8 If you want the canadian identity to be reduced to being a consumer, who lives north of 'murica' then you would have no problems with destroying the canadian identity and tribe. [SEP] Canada is a mostly a christian/secular country with their own values and identity.
-Thanks for the tips. I doubt ass play is possible. I have begged for anal for a couple months and I'm not getting anywhere. But the handcuffs combined with the flavored lube may do wonders. My SO complains that her throat get sore and she chokes when I get close to finishing and hold her head down. Maybe the cuffs will give her some control. [SEP] My SO complains that her throat get sore and she chokes when I get close to finishing and hold her head down
-He should be hanged for treason. [SEP] He should be hanged
-I thought Minecraft PE was already written in C++. All they've done so far is make it run on Windows 10 and that's about it. > They've already said *many* times they aren't dropping support for Mac and Linux. I'll believe it when I see it. [SEP] I thought Minecraft PE was already written in C++. All they've done so far is make it run on Windows 10 and that's about it.
-Now I know this post will be unpopular, but people who say that the healthcare system should be totally free and the government should provide everybody insurance and there should be no out of pocket costs for anybody in the country... well that idea really makes me angry. You only have to look at what happened in Europe and is still happening in Europe to some extent to know what will happen if we just start spending money again. Certain countries in Europe almost completely went under and if it were not for other countries bailing them out they would have.. and then those countries almost went down as well. The government will never have enough money to pay for everything. If you make every state school in the country free for anybody who wants to go, it would make it far more competitive to get in resulting in less people going. The private universities would likely go out of business and you'd probably end up having to pay professors less. Back on topic, I do agree that the medical costs of the US are high. Its a fact that they are higher here than they are in most other locations across the world. And there are three reasons for that. One is a good reason and I gladly would pay more because of it, the other two are bad reasons and they need to be looked at. The first reason is that when you take the whole healthcare system as a whole, lump it together then find the average that somebody pays, you have to account for the fact that a lot more research happens in the US than in most places around the world, and that accounts a lot towards the higher average cost. I'd gladly may more money for medicines and new procedures knowing that that money will go to a company that is spending billions on research to improve things. The second reason, and one that needs to be looked at is: So many insurance companies do not pay for preventative care. I could be in a third world country and get the flu and be clinging to life and need to be transported back to the states to be looked after. The insurance company will pay every single fee to put me and those traveling with me on a private medical jet and then pay for me to be put in a hospital when I get home. However, paying for the flu shot would save them a lot of money verus the event I were to actually get the flu. The third I have first hand experience with and is a big deal which is why i saved it for last. My dad is a doctor. You should see how much money he pays in medical malpractice insurance. Its more money in that one bill alone than most people make in a year... and it has saved him a few times. People are way to quick to sue doctors and the laws governing what you can sue for need to be tightened up. I'll give you an example: A doctor a few towns over from me was out to dinner with his wife and the doctor saw somebody choking. They could not get it out so the doctor stabbed a ball point pen into the ladies throat in order to save her. She would have died if that doctor was not in the restaurant. However that lady did not like the scar on her neck and sued the doctor for $500,000, won, and the insurance had to pay for it. Stories like that are things that need to be addressed at a equal level as "My flu shot cost me $35 dollars and I think the government should have paid that instead" Because as long as doctors need top ay tens of thousands of dollars in insurance to protect themselves, the prices of those doctors are not going to come down. [SEP] you have to account for the fact that a lot more research happens in the US than in most places around the world, and that accounts a lot towards the higher average cost.
-Successful and intelligent black women are single for basically the same reason OP is having trouble. We may like someone, but majority of the time the attraction is not reciprocated. Albeit you learn to be more open minded because your options are very small considering most guys aren't attracted to you. When you look at it, white women are essentially universally desired, so they can pick whomever they want without a problem usually. Whereas when you're not as desired you really don't have room to be as selective unless you plan on being alone. Which also explains why a lot of black women who don't date outside their race are still single. [SEP] Which also explains why a lot of black women who don't date outside their race are still single.
-The only negative I've discovered is that most do not offer business accounts. But you can still get loans, free checking, savings accounts, and check cards. [SEP] most do not offer business accounts
-Why is he resigning from congress in addition to stepping down as speaker? [SEP] Why is he resigning from congress in addition to stepping down as speaker?
-I agree, but to be honest, it is exhausting to debate with people who quickly agree that the SLoT explains why everyone else is wrong, but that their idea is still correct. > science progresses one funeral at a time This phrase has mostly outlived it's validity. There are very few people who dominate their field that completely today. Honestly, you can get traction if you have a theory and experimental evidence, it's just that most outsiders don't bother with both. [SEP] most outsiders don't bother with both.
-I dunno, I'm older. Seeing what's happened to election season enthusiasm every four years has led me to believe that a whole lot of nothing will happen. We had all this saber rattling with the tea party in 2008, people were talking revolution and a new third party -- where is the tea party today? Where is Sarah Palin, the favorite candidate of the tea party? The problem is that these people hate and distrust the government so much that they're unable to work within the system to make the kind of changes they want. That is key. All they're talking about is how corrupt the media is, how the election is rigged, how their own party is abandoning them -- it's a total "us vs the world" mentality. That's not going to lead to any real movement politically. You're going to see some noise from the fringe alt-right, but people who band together over their hate for a president have traditionally never fared well. [SEP] where is the tea party today?
-Knowing how to solve problems efficiently and streamlined has to do with your knowledge of algorithms or Language specific constructs that are efficient and streamlined, so it comes with time and just pure learning by heart is no help (you need experience in mapping a problem onto another problem you already know the solution for and then adapting that solution structure). [SEP] you need experience in mapping a problem onto another problem you already know the solution for
-I think the general population likes Eminem because he's fucking good. I don't think Eminem's mass appeal is really that he's white, but more that he's super fucking talented. The biggest artists (Tupac, Biggie, Jay Z, Kanye, etc) break cultural barriers based on talent. Although when it comes to guys like Watsky and Hoodie Allen, it probably has a lot to do with race and background. I'm honestly not convinced that's a bad thing either. People are drawn to music they identify with. Hoodie Allen is gonna be talking about some suburban shit, so my sister loves him. My sister isn't going to be riding around listening to Pusha talking about slinging bricks. [SEP] People are drawn to music they identify with. Hoodie Allen is gonna be talking about some suburban shit, so my sister loves him. My sister isn't going to be riding around listening to Pusha talking about slinging bricks.
-Easy for you to say. As a JG fan, that 33-race winless streak last year wasn't easy to get over. [SEP] Easy for you to say. As a JG fan, that 33-race winless streak last year wasn't easy to get over.
-you know you can just drag them to the side to make them smaller... right? [SEP] you know you can just drag them to the side to make them smaller... right?
-> That, as a nation, we only care about what happens when we don't think people deserved the violence done upon them. It happens when people don't understand the motives behind violence. >When there are shootings in run-down areas where drugs and crime are rampant, we have a underlying, subconscious feeling that it comes with the territory. Because there are recognizable motives: the drug trade, ensuing gang rivalries, poverty related crime like robbery, etc. >Suddenly a bunch of movie-goers in surburbia CO get killed by a crazy person and like The Onion points out, we go into our highly refined post-catastrophe mode Because it's seemingly senseless with no easy-to-grasp motive. >we won't be able to develop ways to prevent this so long as this is our national knee-jerk reaction. Exactly what ways are there to prevent this? As much as you've mentioned "dealing with broader issues" you've failed to actually articulate any. [SEP] Exactly what ways are there to prevent this? As much as you've mentioned "dealing with broader issues" you've failed to actually articulate any.
-> Solo content would have to be tuned toward a middle-of-the-road healer in cleric stance. Or just have separate instances for each job. Tank instances deal more damage, healer instances have things to protect, and DPS instances have time limits. Other things work too, but they can cater the content to the class. > I'd really prefer they fix the current social elements; several of the current systems are so hysterically bad for an MMO that it hurts. I really enjoy this game a lot, but sooooo many of the systems and blockings in place are just absolutely awful for a multiplayer experience. I agree with the latter, but they don't really have much to do with what's being mentioned. Being able to play with others more outside of raids doesn't really help you find competent raiders. A lot of servers have people shuffling around and kicking members every day in search of their golden goose which they still can't find. When it comes down to it, I think it's just that the gap between casual and hardcore content is too small, but the skill level required is huge. > Randomizing mechanics is, generally, not the best course of action. I think fights with randomized mechanics are much more fun. Moggle, for example, is much more interesting to me because things happen in a chaotic order (unless you play tank and sit in a corner, that part needed work). > Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but isn't this precisely what Savage already does? A lot of people don't find Savage to be fun, especially the groups who have hit a wall. Personally I enjoy raiding, but it would probably be more enjoyable all around if they released more bosses per tier. Instead of going from difficulty 1,3,8,10; they could have a slower and steady increase. More variety and more "accomplishment" points will keep it more entertaining for a while. And people who raid competitively have more races to win. [SEP] Or just have separate instances for each job. Tank instances deal more damage, healer instances have things to protect, and DPS instances have time limits. Other things work too, but they can cater the content to the class.
-I'm fine with a limit of about a million a year. The rest of that money should be going towards the workers in the company. "You" shouldn't be profiting massively while millions of people are worried whether or not they can afford to live for the next 30 days. > But then what happens if I'm in independent software developer that suddenly has a huge hit on his hands, like Notch had with Minecraft, and by some stroke of luck have made several million dollars in a month. I'm not ripping off money that should be shared with employees because I don't have any employees to exploit. If that is the case, then sure, take your money. I don't have a problem with that, as long as you're not actively stepping on everyone just to get a little more. >So what happens to all that extra money? Does anything I make after $20,000 just vanish and go to the government just because I made it all at once instead of over a period of time? Does that sound fair to you? ...really should've let me answer before typing this one, huh? [SEP] ...really should've let me answer before typing this one, huh?
-Why do we need incendiary rounds? Agreed a whack-job could make them, but wouldn't it be possible that a jacketed round would cause a spark, or even oil on the bullet from the shooters fingers could start an O2 compression explosion caused by the puncture, or even that the bullet itself would be tremendously hot from the friction with the barrel (any shooter who's ever burned his leg while shooting from rest can attest to how hot the barrel gets with only a few rounds). Again, I don't find the idea likely, but "its absurd that a high-powered bullet into a gigantic tin can filled with O2 & jet fuel creates an explosion" is not convincing to me. [SEP] Why do we need incendiary rounds?
-You are saying you'd love to constrain freedoms to further your own personal agenda? You sir, are a fascist, I hope you die of malnutrition. [SEP] You are saying you'd love to constrain freedoms to further your own personal agenda?
-Not knowing your wife, I don't know how she would react. I'm not sure I'd want to know. I mean, intellectually I know my mom says all sorts of shit about me to people all the time. But actually hearing what she said... it would probably put me into a funk for days. I'd want to defend myself and explain why she's wrong. And there's nothing I can do about it because confronting her is doomed to failure. This might be a case where not telling the specifics are better. It may be a place to open up a conversation about how you can set boundaries with MIL, though. Just "yeesh, your mom, she started spewing shit at me and I didn't know how to shut her down. I ended up having to flee. Any idea on how I could handle this better next time?" [SEP] I'm not sure I'd want to know. I mean, intellectually I know my mom says all sorts of shit about me to people all the time. But actually hearing what she said... it would probably put me into a funk for days. I'd want to defend myself and explain why she's wrong. And there's nothing I can do about it because confronting her is doomed to failure.
-> It would have taken me much longer to get geared in D2 without trading, and the same is true for this game. No, that depends on what you mean by "get geared." A lot of people trading in D2 were already doing Hell Baal runs. They were already geared up to a great extent. They were searching for more gear because, for whatever reason, they wanted it, not because they needed it--huge difference. > Nobody actually knows what the game would be like without it, it's just used as a simplistic catch-all for people not having fun. Yes, of course they do. There are other ARPGs out there that do not have central AHs. [SEP] They were already geared up to a great extent. They were searching for more gear because, for whatever reason, they wanted it, not because they needed it--huge difference.
-Why would MS need to certify their own devices? It may well come with permanent Secure Boot. [SEP] It may well come with permanent Secure Boot.
-Remember , for a lot of our media McG has the wrong Dublin accent to be making the kind of cash he is currently bringing in, taking shots at a guy upsetting the apple cart is par for the course. [SEP] Remember , for a lot of our media McG has the wrong Dublin accent to be making the kind of cash he is currently bringing in
-> My sandwich is no more logically limited than God, Well of course it is, just as my circle is logically limited to not being a square. > though, and I would argue that omnimaxity IS logically impossible anyway. Okay good, I would probably argue the same thing. > Right. That's the point. You can swap it out with anything you want and get the same result. In terms of its name sure, but you still have all the baggage from the concept that Plantinga is arguing for. So you're not going against Plantinga's argument. You're just putting a different hat on. > Exactly. And the MOA fails for exactly the same reason. Saying that the ultimate sandwich is more limited than God is only special pleading. It isn't, since special pleading requires the distinction to be made in arbitrariness, but there's nothing arbitrary about saying that sandwich, as a physical thing, does not contain the same properties as a supposed God, which is not physical. > He's says he's only trying to prove that belief in God is "reasonable" but he doesn't demonstrate that either. Well clearly he does, since his argument is valid. > His definition of "maximal excellence" is incoherent, his premise that maximal excellence "possibly exists is undemonstrated and does not actually look logically possible and his S5 axiom is just hocus pocus - an attempt to wand wave "possible" necessity into actual necessity. We might want to deny S5, but it isn't hocus pocus even if we did. It's a complex topic in logic that I do not have the background in to fully explain. [SEP] Well of course it is, just as my circle is logically limited to not being a square.
-Not often, but I don't visit new reddits much these days. I know that the rate limit is strictly subreddit specific because I've seen the site admins say so in the past, however I don't feel like digging up proof, so like I said, believe whatever you want. [SEP] Not often, but I don't visit new reddits much these days. I know that the rate limit is strictly subreddit specific because I've seen the site admins say so in the past, however I don't feel like digging up proof, so like I said, believe whatever you want.
-I'll be the first to admit that I have no clue wtf is going on right now as far as the plot/story is concerned....which seems to be about par for the course. [SEP] I'll be the first to admit
-The Vision of Escaflowne / Neon Genesis Evangelion / Akira / Rurouni Kenshin / Cowboy Bebop / Perfect Blue / Yu Yu Hakusho / Ghost in the Shell / Vampire Hunter D / Ninja Scroll / Grave of the Fireflies / Serial Experiments Lain / Mononoke Hime / The Irresponsible Captain Tylor / Record of Lodoss War / Bubblegum Crisis / Vampire Princess Miyu / Wicked City / Blood+ / Demon City Shinjuku / Dante's Inferno [SEP] The Vision of Escaflowne
-> This last point is the point I would appreciate if you could somehow source. I don't mean to sound like I doubt you, but there are lots of people making statements on either side of this argument, and a credible source would be enough to cmv. Direct Stream Digital has a sampling rate of 2.8 MHz If your average record needle travels at 2 kph (which is generous), then it will cover 55 cm in a second. That means the needle will need to about hit 51,000 grooves every centimeter to maintain that sampling rate. Googling tells me the size of a vinyl particle is about 1 to 100 micrometers. However, to get a sampling rate of 2.8 MHz would require a groove to be .19 micrometers wide. The smallest possible particle of vinyl is 5 times larger than what would be required for that sampling rate. Therefore, it is physically impossible to encode that much data into a standard record. Of course you could speed up a record and get more data on it, but we don't play records that fast. Also, you'd lose detail due to the momentum of the needle. [SEP] The smallest possible particle of vinyl is 5 times larger than what would be required for that sampling rate. Therefore, it is physically impossible to encode that much data into a standard record.
-Main issue with running very hot though, means that these 1070 equipped machines are actually slower than the thick machines, by virtue of boost/throttling. All the aorus machines so far, and partially the gigabytes, have had subpar cooling :( which results in lower CPU and GPU performance compared to most of the competition. [SEP] which results in lower CPU and GPU performance
-I love how they buy them before they're even authorised to use them. Repression is a necessarily part of the austerity agenda as seen around Europe, no surprise this is happening but it won't stop the forces that seek a different world, one that doesn’t benefit the few at the expense of the many. It won't be long before they get other lethal weapons such as tear gas, rubber bullets and flash bangs (in fact they’ve already got rubber bullets but they were mainly for the students and striking workers – there's a weapon for each group that contests capital or the state). [SEP] lethal weapons such as tear gas, rubber bullets and flash bangs
-When the book first came out there were many discussions regarding this. I'm on your side of this particular issue. What it comes down to, in my opinion, is that if it's Merlin it's some damn lazy writing. Jim can be lazy, but he's not that lazy. Perhaps it's one of the previous Wardens of Demonreach. Perhaps it's Jack the Ripper. Have some fun imagining who it might be. Jumping straight to Merlin is boring. [SEP] Perhaps it's Jack the Ripper.
-We hate bad cops, the good cops who just do their job never make the news. [SEP] We hate bad cops, the good cops who just do their job never make the news.
-So, I can freely call all the S Italians "terroni" and there will be no problem? According to your thesis that one can be "terrone" without beeing labeled as slacker etc etc. I truly don't think so. And also seems to me that here everybody are thinking only, and exclusively, about the mere literal meaning, forgetting about the significant of the words....that is the main cause of argument. So, I, personally tend to do not use any of these words, even in a funny way, awake of the facts that someone could feel upset to be named like...and viceversa, I don't like to be labeled as "polentone". Even if the terms could fit my nature, or my geographycal position. [SEP] So, I can freely call all the S Italians "terroni" and there will be no problem?
->Maybe you set the limit lower, but if you're arrested for fraud it's pretty hard to come out and get a nice job since nobody can trust you, so you'll end up being a server at Applebee's, in which your actual restitution would be roughly $0. So we don't make restitution zero dollars for people earning that little. It's won't much, but it's still something for the victims, as opposed to nothing and a big cost to society. Plus did I mention community service? Don't underestimate the importance of that! If done right, people doing community service can be a great resource. >Again, this seems to be coming from a place of ignorance. Yes, it is that easy, that's why bail and bounty hunters exist. It's that easy *when you don't take measures.* How do you sneak anywhere when you have a monitoring bracelet that records everything that you do, and as soon as you get near an airport or start to try to remove it, officers are dispatched? Answer: You don't. That's not what we're doing now, and we really shouldn't be doing that now except in *flight risk* situations. Like the ones that you are talking about. YOU are the one who is refusing to actually engage with the subject, because you seem to think that just because we aren't taking the sort of measures that I am talking about now, we can't ever take those measures. We can. And they would work, the vast majority of the time. And they would be much cheaper than TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS A YEAR(!!!) for DECADES. [SEP] And they would be much cheaper than TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS A YEAR(!!!) for DECADES.
-Look, i doubt CM punk is going to be worth a damn in the cage. But why are people automaticly counting him out? We really have no clue at this point. Im excited for him to prove me and everyone else wrong. [SEP] But why are people automaticly counting him out?
-Oooooooh, I see. What you meant by "horrible, ruined games" was actually "games I don't personally like." And no, that's not right, it's just your shitty opinion. "If i can't spend 500 hours on a game it's garbage". You sound like the worst kind of gamer. The Witcher 3, The Mass Effect Series, Dragon Age, The Last of Us... 60 bucks is a very fair price for the hours of fun and amazing stories from each of these games. Sorry they don't cut your elitist standard of 500 hours of playtime and extreme modifiability. Lastly I just find it funny that your opposed to having fun on a game if it's too short for you. "Oh my god that game looks amazing. Graphics look awesome, storyline looks intense and gripping, customization and non-linear gameplay, oh wait, DAMN *only 200 hours of gameplay*. Ah, not worth it." [SEP] The Witcher 3, The Mass Effect Series, Dragon Age, The Last of Us... 60 bucks is a very fair price for the hours of fun and amazing stories from each of these games. Sorry they don't cut your elitist standard of 500 hours of playtime and extreme modifiability.
-1. Yes, if too many episodes pass where I don't get a chance to see something or forget to watch it I'll declare it "on hold". This happens a lot with shows airing on cable. For example I have missed too many episodes of Black Lagoon (for some reason FIOS thinks the episodes are reruns and doesn't tape them. . .it hasn't been on TV before, has it?). I'm gonna be lost if I just watch next weeks. 2. because in the time I watched it it has given me no reason to drop, but it isn't competing with the other shows I'm watching that season. . . so I say I'll get back to it at a later date. 3. **Hajime no Ippo**. I should have finished it by now, because I'm only watching 3 currently running shows. .. .but i haven't even been watching those. That show is seriously good, and if Summer is as loaded as I expect it to be it's not gonna be easy to finish it then either. It's the same with **Michiko to Hatchin**. Spring was supposed to be my backlog season, and it just isn't happening. [SEP] For example I have missed too many episodes of Black Lagoon (for some reason FIOS thinks the episodes are reruns and doesn't tape them. . .it hasn't been on TV before, has it?
-Are you talking about Xbox player counts? On what server are you playing that there are a plethora of high tier tanks? Xbox version is also very bare for finding videos or info about it. Almost everything is PC based, which is similar but you can't really count on. Many players keep 5 or 6 tanks are money makers. You just made my point, new players can only hope to have 5 or 6 useful tanks at all. They run into guys like you who have stocked up tanks, crewed up, gold ammo, top gun, and are supposed to somehow outplay you? Game is fun once you get to higher levels, and most people are close to even in skill and tanks, and they know how to use them very efficiently. But that takes A LOT OF games to get there, and the grind is not welcoming to new players. Then jump from 8 to 10 isn't FAR different then a jump from 3 to 5, or 6 to 8. Almost every single person I play with that plays in top tiers is using Premium, premium rounds, and has crews leveled up. [SEP] Are you talking about Xbox player counts? On what server are you playing that there are a plethora of high tier tanks?
->the peak frequency is close to 56Hz Almost certainly either 60 or 50 Hz, or some multiple thereof (60, 120, 240, etc...) on the nose, depending on your local grid. South America is pretty broken up, so you'll have to confirm yourself. >I am planning to build some bass traps with mineral wool in form of panels, place them in the corners of the room (as the standard procedure for studio rooms). However, other strategy is to build a double ceiling with similar materials (since de noise comes from above). A third strategy is to cover my window with a curtain made of that material (thinking that the noise may come from outside too). Unlikely to help. This will simply reduce nodes and stuff, and make the sound nice and clean. >(since de noise comes from above)....(thinking that the noise may come from outside too). Dollars to donuts says it's coupling through the walls. That's bad news for you, since you have cinderblock walls and can't change them. The real (but difficult) solution is to change the frequency of the AC unit (impossible) or change the frequency of your walls (less impossible). Decoupling the AC unit from the walls will help, but I don't think it's practical since the AC unit depends on a healthy seal on the window, and disrupting that with all rubber and bellows and stuff will be hard and make your neighbor angry. The solution that jumps immediately to mind is to determine if your walls are hollow, and if they are to fill the voids with something like quickrete or expanding foam. That will change the resonant frequency of your walls and decouple them from the AC unit. [SEP] The solution that jumps immediately to mind is to determine if your walls are hollow, and if they are to fill the voids with something like quickrete or expanding foam. That will change the resonant frequency of your walls and decouple them from the AC unit.
-It's a complicated question with no easy answers. Part of it depends on how much the nations of the world are willing to cooperate in order to enforce regulation of space travel and colonization. Part of it depends on the capability of world nations to enforce whatever laws and regulations they pass. For example, if we were to figure out a way to colonize the moon and make it self-sufficient we'd be in easy range of any colonies to enforce our will for better or worse. Any colonies would need to step carefully in order to avoid any appearance of rebellion less they get quashed vigorously. Maybe at some future time those colonies will be granted autonomy but at first most nations are going to want to keep control of any resources. The farther out we progress (again assuming we can manage it) the harder it will become to maintain control. When messages take hours and days to get to their destination and travel is measured in months and years it's not going to be possible to maintain a firm grip or respond to immediate concerns. Any ventures beyond our orbit will necessarily have a degree of autonomy knowing that any displeasure they provoke will offer them plenty of time to formulate a response. So I consider it highly likely that it would begin with a dog-eat-dog competition for prime locations and resources with petty concerns for life and property being treated as secondary to control. It all depends on what technologies we develop to overcome the obstacles presented by space travel and colonization. [SEP] Any colonies would need to step carefully in order to avoid any appearance of rebellion less they get quashed vigorously.
-I moved a lot when I was a kid and twice I was in the same situation. Both times about 3 months after I had moved, the mild taunting/bullying had escalated enough that another kid wanted to fight me for no reason. Both times I ended it quickly, the kid whined that I didn't fight fair and no one ever picked on me again. [SEP] the kid whined that I didn't fight fair
-Why do you say Islamic extremists instead of Muslims when you don’t say White Nationalist extremists? White nationalism doesn’t have an invisible man in the sky who wrote a book telling them to kill the infidels, advocating lying to gain their trust. The shooting in Charleston, which wasn’t even really a terrorist attack, was condemned by every white nationalist and racist group I know of. How many Islamic groups out there support and celebrate violence perpetrated in the name of their faith? [SEP] White nationalism doesn’t have an invisible man in the sky who wrote a book telling them to kill the infidels, advocating lying to gain their trust.
-I'm not talking about Western feminists. I'm talking about Muslim women in the Middle East that are under the boot of men. Shouldn't feminism be focused on an issue like that, instead of a dude on tv saying a Girl is hot, or whatever the fuck they're upset with these days. On the religion thing, it's funny. For example, here in Ireland women were treated like dirt for many years, largely people considered, because of the Catholic Church. But in the end it wasn't religion that was broken down, it was society's sexism, once that changed, the religion changed, and not the other way around. It's only now that the CC is finally falling in Ireland, but then again, divorce was still illegal when I was born, as was homosexuality, so we've come a decent way. [SEP] On the religion thing, it's funny. For example, here in Ireland women were treated like dirt for many years, largely people considered, because of the Catholic Church. But in the end it wasn't religion that was broken down, it was society's sexism
-There's a big difference between blunt and intentionally hurtful. INTJs can err towards blunt, for sure, but it doesn't give us free reign to be assholes about it. It's the difference between "look, this is pissing me off" and "you're a fucking bitch for doing this." So which is it? As an INTJ, I value honesty above pretty much everything. I don't sugar-coat, because I see sugar-coating insulting to both myself and the recipient; sugar-coating assumes that you're dealing with someone who is incapable of dealing with the realities of life and needs to be wrapped in cotton at all times, which is infantilizing and patronizing. It insinuates that you do not believe you're dealing with an adult who is capable of dealing with reality and that you and you alone are the only one capable of living in said reality, which is insanely egotistical. However, I cannot stand people who say 'oh I'm just blunt and honest' when really, they're being intentionally malicious and using 'bluntness' and 'honesty' as a cover for being hurtful and cruel. If your partner is being hurtful and cruel, you need to find a new one. If your partner is being legitimately honest and straight forward, that means he sees you as an adult capable of dealing with reality as it is. One is blatant disrespect, one is a deep level of respect. Only you know which one it is. [SEP] If your partner is being hurtful and cruel, you need to find a new one.
-> *That's a false dichotomy. There are more options. How about God is neutral and determines what is just using his vast knowledge.* Then he wants it to be just, or he'd use his omnipotence to change whatever facts of the matter lead to it being just. Or does God not have that power? > *Of course this is a hypothetical discussion and doesn't reflect my own thoughts.* That's fine, it's an interesting discussion. [SEP] Then he wants it to be just, or he'd use his omnipotence to change whatever facts of the matter lead to it being just. Or does God not have that power?
-No minimum income. Put all lazy ones to work. >3,000 jobs up for grabs but only about 500 potential applicants showed up http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/tsawwassen-mills-job-fair-fails-to-attract-hoped-for-job-seekers-1.3727811 There is no excuse not to work. [SEP] There is no excuse not to work.
-He's shutting us all up and showing up today. I really thought he was going to shit the bed. [SEP] He's shutting us all up
-Oh one thing I forgot: Randomized Moon is a planned run, and that will likely take into account the people that skip Sun for spoilers reasons (or other reasons they might be unavailable). So, I think having Sun as close to day 1 and then Randomized Moon later in Season 4 (maybe last run of Season 3) is the best way to go. [SEP] Randomized Moon is a planned run, and that will likely take into account the people that skip Sun for spoilers reasons (or other reasons they might be unavailable).
-The quote is from the "Daily Mirror", upon visiting their website lethargically I stumbled upon said article. I searched and searched for a quote till I reached the end by which time I realised the whole goal of the article was for me to consume their horse-shite. The quote read as follows: **A squad ­member said: ­“Everyone was surprised that the boss ­decided on Thursday that Robin was not allowed to come with us.”** "A squad member".............what have we done to deserve such shoddy workmanship from the "journalists" of today? [SEP] what have we done to deserve such shoddy workmanship from the "journalists" of today?
-Uhh... Didn't the Brits make Bombay by reclaiming land? Edit : it used to be communities of fishermen before that but the Brits shaped Mumbai as we know it today by reclaiming land and connecting islands. [SEP] Didn't the Brits make Bombay by reclaiming land?
-You said he shouldn't have disagreed with a feminist if he didn't want to get kicked out of the class. If you don't think that him getting kicked out was justified for that action then you wouldn't have said that. And oh yeah I must be *sooo* angry because I made a passing comment that your post was retarded. Because people only say things like that when they're *really* angry, right? Are you sure it's not you that has been enraged by my remark and this is your attempt at deflecting your butthurt? [SEP] You said he shouldn't have disagreed with a feminist if he didn't want to get kicked out of the class. If you don't think that him getting kicked out was justified for that action then you wouldn't have said that.
-The whole gay/bi/str8 thing IS ridiculous. But the facts are that if I go have a few beers with my boys this weekend, and tell them about the amazing head my gay neighbor gave me..... it'll be an issue. Society is absurd in that way. As time goes by I'm caring less and less. Almost proud of it in a way. I was incredibly turned on as it was happening. It felt so wrong.... but that's what was so hot about it. However, I still won't tell anyone about it just yet. Other than maybe a couple of my closest girlfriends. [SEP] As time goes by I'm caring less and less. Almost proud of it in a way.
-College graduates have several things: Training Experience Proven skills The ability to finish what they start Sure, there have been some great self-taught designers. David Carson was one. But he was one in a million, which means there are 999,999 chances you are not one. As it stands your portfolio will only get you absolute bottom rung design jobs, maybe working in a print shop. The work is far too basic and it doesn't demonstrate whatever creativity you may have. [SEP] College graduates have several things:
-Hey I didn't mean anything bad against them, I love shut up and sit down. They do ooze middle class though. [SEP] They do ooze middle class though.
-I think your approach works for the most part, but if I'm the interviewer I am looking for an actual weakness (ex: I am a weak in technical writing) and what they are doing to *improve* upon that weakness (I am taking a class/writing a technical blog/submitting articles to a peer reviewed journal). Turn the weakness into a strength by actually identifying and addressing the problem. I don't want a BS answer about how you're such a hard worker. [SEP] I don't want a BS answer about how you're such a hard worker.
-There is absolutely no reason why you would see increased ranged through r-hop or flat hop. The idea behind them is better consistency between BB and bucking. Increasing accuracy not range. That being said, my guns are all flat hopped which is enormously easier, and are plenty accurate as far as BB go. [SEP] There is absolutely no reason why you would see increased ranged through r-hop or flat hop.
-I think there are some valid points. Not about the protein shakes, etc. But about the sense of community and the culture that spending too long at the gym can foster. I've read recently that bigorexia (thinking you're small when you're muscular) is becoming a substantial issue for weightlifters in particular. It's probable that starting boys at the gym earlier will increase the chances of that - kids are far more easily influenced than adults. Encouraging a group to participate in an activity that can have lasting harm on your body at a very young age does have a lot of detriments to it. Personally, based off of the sheer abuse of equipment I see at my gym, I think it'd be best if newbies had to attend a "gym safety" seminar to teach them not to be complete idiots. And to fucking rerack their weights. [SEP] I've read recently that bigorexia (thinking you're small when you're muscular) is becoming a substantial issue for weightlifters in particular.
-Thats 2 hours, so the overheads of takeoff and landing get amortized over a longer flight duration... As you go shorter, the overheads form a larger percentage.. takeoff and landing are not at max speed, the cruise is much higher speed >I don't think, they are thinking in terms of poor people, more in terms of infra and job development Then the focus would have been roads and railway tracks. The one thing air travel is good at is that it needs relatively less infra >that depends on value of your time. if you value 4 hour saved, more than 1000, you will go for it. most IT workers are paid 2k per day for 8 hour work. Someone who values their time at Rs 250/hour is not someone who needs to be subsidised by the tax paying public of this country. EDIT: and free time doesnt really have the same worth as work time. If a flight costs Rs 3k and an overnight volvo 1.5k, I'm taking the Volvo cause I can sleep 7 hours... [SEP] The one thing air travel is good at is that it needs relatively less infra
-A crime I did not commit... This is the shitty side of out justice system, I will be forever known as the person who was arrested for this crime. That being said the best analogy is that of quick sand, I felt like everything I did I just dug my hole deeper... You can't breathe, there's no respite, you wake up feeling like someone is squeezing your heart. I fled before I was arrested because I didn't know what else to do... edit spelling [SEP] you wake up feeling like someone is squeezing your heart
-This has me a little worried since there is so little info. Is this about Dockett since people seemed to like him and he was a vet? Are they crazy enough to cut Hayne? Yesterday I was so happy watching those guys ( all the 2nd and 3rd stringers) play their heart out and now it has ended :( [SEP] all the 2nd and 3rd stringers) play their heart out and now it has ended
-The threads linked within the FAQ contain answers. Yes, a more succinct version would be appreciated. [SEP] The threads linked within the FAQ contain answers.
-Says the fool who declares those with opposing opinions as trolls. Your posts are hate filled, flinging insults at anyone who disagrees with you. Here is a taste of your own medicine. Just because you read a list of rhetoric fallacies, doesn't mean you know how to use them. Come up with a cogent argument that isn't centered around gross over generalization before you use big boy words. [SEP] Your posts are hate filled, flinging insults at anyone who disagrees with you.
-Other species do not rear their prey into lives of misery for the sole purpose of consumption. We are disrupting the natural order - like I've said in a previous comment, I do not find much issue in humans following the natural order and hunting. Domestication is different because we breed these conscious animals into lives of absolute misery and suffering that they understand. When a wolf kills an animal in nature, the animal lives a free life until it succumbs to its trophic superior. I am not trying to say that humans exist outside of nature either - I am simply using the word 'natural' contextually. [SEP] Domestication is different because we breed these conscious animals into lives of absolute misery and suffering that they understand.
-And the edible sort of pigeon rather than the common city vermin type (they're different breeds). [SEP] (they're different breeds)
-Because in no world should your champion and top guy lose, twice in a row, to a fucking jobber. It shouldn't even be a discussion. >throw out insults that don't make sense. Not going to lie, I'm feeling pretty smug right now. [SEP] Because in no world should your champion and top guy lose, twice in a row, to a fucking jobber. It shouldn't even be a discussion.
-To be honest, Shinji was made, in part, as a reaction to the older mech franchise protagonists. Individuals who, when forced into a giant robot by fate, confidently step up and save the world (or something or other). It's a power fantasy, and Anno had issue with that. So he devised a character archetype that fit the exact opposite archetype. That archetype's been oversimplified as angst, but Shinji himself is a very well-characterized person, angst and all. [SEP] confidently step up and save the world (or something or other)
-I think "(all else being equal)" includes the block size (if that abstract coin uses blocks to store transactions). Just to prove that you are making a mistake by assuming that larger block size = higher centralization, consider a thought experiment: Bitcoin with 1Kb blocks every 10 minutes. Do you think Bitcoin with 1Kb blocks (a full node can be run even on a smartphone!) would be more decentralized than Bitcoin with 1Mb blocks? I think not, because most of the people won't have a reason to run it. A few enthusiasts could run the full nodes, but that would probably not be sufficient to achieve the current level of decentralization. Do you understand now why I think that the argument that larger blocks always cause centralization needs to be proven (and is probably false)? [SEP] Do you think Bitcoin with 1Kb blocks (a full node can be run even on a smartphone!) would be more decentralized than Bitcoin with 1Mb blocks?
-I have to think that one: they will pry her secrets out of her pretty damn quick. At the very least her identity. And two: why would you stay a darkfriend if you literally have nobody to serve anymore? Why help her if there is nobody to punish you for failure to do so? [SEP] why would you stay a darkfriend if you literally have nobody to serve anymore
-I played the Beta. The tl;dr: If you have Rimworld- go play that instead. The game itself has some good things going for it, the atmosphere and the writing and concepts are well planned out but it's execution could use some work. I've found that the pacing of the game and how you progress seems to need work. You designate an area for trees to be felled and something like a basic dormitory to be setup. That process alone will take the colonists several days to do. The UI is a bit difficult to grasp as well, nothing on the level of Dward Fortress but the amount of menus and lines and logs you have to go through to figure out where the break in a production line happens is maddening, the extra detail that they put into the texture and terrain works against the art style in making it difficult to differentiate between an item of interest on the ground and non-interactable texture. There's also the sheer amount of busywork that's required. You build a stone oven and you assign a person to cook soup. A person grabs one unit of vegetable over to a stove and then stands over it for several hours and produces 1 soup. That 1 soup is enough to feed one colonist for a few hours, so you have a good portion of your workforce cooking food at all times. Then a stove breaks and you have to manually click to have it repaired, which could cause a chain break that results in a good portion of your colony starving. I only have about 20-30 hours into the game and this is from months ago- but everytime I pick it up I think to myself "Why am I not playing Rimworld instead?" Every mechanic and feature of the game is done better in Rimworld, there's even a Lovecraft mod for Rimworld now too. [SEP] there's even a Lovecraft mod for Rimworld now too.
-Subway's a franchise, so it's up to the owners. Most will let their workers, but some are greedy and don't treat their employees well. [SEP] don't treat their employees well.
-> All you have done is spout one-liner 'refutations', without actually addressing any points I have made, as well as shifted the goalposts several times. You should go back to the beginning of this dialogue where I stated that I have nothing to gain by proving yet another faceless person on the internet wrong and I have no desire to do so. It has gained me nothing in the past and it will gain me nothing by doing so now. You keep making excuses about why the parties are identical; "Romney's a flip flopper" "GOP wants Obama to fail." Obama has not reversed Bush's policies; he has renewed them. Tax cuts for the rich, war in the middle east, renewing and expanding the patriot act, war on marijuana dispensaries, failing to hold Wall Street accountable, continuing Gitmo incarcerations, and on and on. You need to make excuses for all of these things. I think personally I am most interested in knowing why Obama took a single payer option off the table from the beginning of health care discussions. Same fucking thing on both sides of the aisle. [SEP] You keep making excuses about why the parties are identical; "Romney's a flip flopper" "GOP wants Obama to fail."
-The creepiest thing is that there was no music. Some say he's still dancing to this very day. [SEP] Some say he's still dancing to this very day.
-It depends on the person I'm hugging. I have to stand on something to hug one of my best friends (he's 6'8), so our perfect hugs are ones where I'm near something I can use as a ladder. Another one of my friends always kisses my cheek when she hugs me and that's nice. Then there are back-scratchers and bear-huggers. I dunno, they're all perfect in their own ways. Apparently I am a huge hippie about hugs. [SEP] Then there are back-scratchers
-If I decide that I would quit my job, no amount of salary increase can change my mind. It's because I feel it creates a bad atmosphere when you forfeit your previous decision. In your manager's eye, you become the person who threatens to get a salary increase. Other may have a pure economical approach, but that's just me. [SEP] If I decide that I would quit my job, no amount of salary increase can change my mind.
-OS X comes with usually not up-to-date versions of Python and Ruby. It's not unlikely you'd need to get newer versions from a package manager or even compile them yourself, for some projects. > Plus, you know, there's the whole utility of not having written this in JavaScript and instead having it written in a language people want/like to read/use/extend. While you may dislike Javascript, and so do I to some degree, but: a) It does not have a small community by any measure. I don't think, if this tool gathered some following, that nobody would contribute to it just because it is JS. b) We haven't actually looked at the code. It might look great, it might look terrible, but using Javascript does not guarantee either of them. You can write horrible Python or Ruby that nobody wants to work with. > ("fucking node.js" is meant to display ire toward node.js and it's trendy bullshit, not toward the original comment) :) People that tell you to replace all your servers with node.js are spewing trendy bullshit. People that say things like 'web-scale' as an argument for node are too. That does not mean *every usage* of node is bullshit. It is a language runtime like any other, and immediately hating any project using it makes no sense. [SEP] OS X comes with usually not up-to-date versions of Python and Ruby.
-I'm sorry but I disliked Walter Jr. from the start. He never did anything that deserved my dislike, as a matter of fact he probably suffered the most out of any character in the show in terms of Walt's unintended consequences. Not to mention he suffered from cerebral palsy, and he was depicted as receiving hate from other kids about it. I just didn't like him.... fuck I am an asshole. [SEP] as a matter of fact he probably suffered the most out of any character in the show in terms of Walt's unintended consequences
-Do you want to live in a society where your neighbor can incinerate the entire neighborhood (or city for that matter)? Face it, my little guns are cap guns when it comes down to it, so cast your vote carefully. If you want the government to be less likely to break your door down, vote Democrat ;) [SEP] If you want the government to be less likely to break your door down, vote Democrat
-I don't think thats the case with the VA. They have a huge budget. THe problem is when there are 8 psychologists that only see 3 patients a week, due to union constraints….thats the problem. Put Congress and the senate on the VA system and you'll see how fast that gets straightened out [SEP] there are 8 psychologists that only see 3 patients a week, due to union constraints
-Real story: We were in port a few days ago, and a cat came aboard via mooring line. We lost track of her, and found her later that evening. We managed to get her back to the pier, and waved goodbye as we took off. This cat seemed unusually upset by this... Turns out, in the short time she was on board, she gave birth to THREE kittens. We found the other two after I submitted this post. The poor things went almost four days with no food or mommy before we found them in the machine shop. We have been bottle feeding them all day, and have already contacted local veterinary services to come check them out. After the initial shock of being found, and feeding, the kittens are just as happy and playful as any other cute little bugger you'd find anywhere else. They were a great boost to crew moral, and I LOVE THEM. I'm a sucker. tl;dr Yes, it was really a stowaway. And now I love him. [SEP] And now I love him
->oh ok. so the guy would have still shot 70 people, plus the 1 that the hero shot. got it. The risk is that multiple people are carrying concealed weapons, they cannot tell who is helping and who is an accomplice, and the entire situation escalates. The guy was mentally ill. He rigged his apartment to explode, and he compared himself to the Joker. Increased risk of dying would not have prevented him from trying to kill people. [SEP] The guy was mentally ill. He rigged his apartment to explode, and he compared himself to the Joker. Increased risk of dying would not have prevented him from trying to kill people.
-**Kindness is only appreciated if it is unexpected.** Men affect something of woman in their first endeavors of love. But a man's love, the love a woman yearns for, is not like that of a woman's. A man's love is virile, domineering and aloof. Stop loving like a woman and you will cease to be treated as such. [SEP] Kindness is only appreciated if it is unexpected.
-Jar jar. Fucking jar jar. [SEP] Fucking jar jar.
-It's almost like it isn't the party in control that determines an area's relative prosperity. I mean, why would the South be poorer? Obviously it's because they vote Republican. No way it could be that whole war thing they lost, their economy being absolutely reduced to nothing, their currency being outlawed, and their leaders being barred from holding office again. That can't have anything to do with it. [SEP] I mean, why would the South be poorer? Obviously it's because they vote Republican.
-> What has been written? Don't just say there is material or there without telling me what it is. I'm not really here to debate, and this really doesn't have to do with complementarianism. >when this had been repeatedly demonstrated to be impossible. I have friends who struggle with this every day, and they willingly die to those desires for the sake of Christ. It's not different than other fleshly desires. We all have them, and to follow Christ means dying to them. If you have any other questions relating to complementarianism, I'll be glad to answer them. Otherwise, I'll move on. [SEP] I'm not really here to debate
-It's on the Aussie one as well, it's also a crime to joke about it. [SEP] it's also a crime to joke about it
-I tend to agree with him. Remember when Vick and McNabb were the shit and everyone was saying that the scrambling QB was the "future"? And then..well...2 years later they got hit a few too many times and couldn't really do that as well anymore? The pocket-presence, "game management" QB is always going to be in demand. They never go out of style. We'll probably see a spike in read option next year, and maybe the year after that, but all it takes is a rough hit and you can't really run anymore. [SEP] The pocket-presence, "game management" QB is always going to be in demand. They never go out of style.
-I've been on reddit long enough to figure out, if there's a will, there's a subreddit. When I misread something like that, the imagery flashing through my mind. It could be anywhere from a shittyfoodporn-esque subreddit, pictures of the "aftermath" of overly spicy foods and all the way across the spectrum to a "cooking w/ naked asian females..or hell... this is the internet. *cooking* naked asian females. But yes. I love /r/FoodPorn .. Mmmm [SEP] cooking w/ naked asian females
-Except all jobs at 15 means you're set to unlock advanced jobs no matter what, and level 1-15 doesn't take that long. He gets to explore more (especially if he actually does his hunt logs), get all those aetherytes in all the cities and zones. I'd probably say let him hit 20 first and get his chocobo, help out the travel. Also, ARC could cross class anything, having all jobs up would give him a lot of options; equipping Protect, casting it, then swapping it for Cure or Bloodbath for soloing was nice. At the very least, get up LNC and PUG for unlocking BRD and having the crossclasses ready. [SEP] Except all jobs at 15 means you're set to unlock advanced jobs no matter what, and level 1-15 doesn't take that long.
-> LGBT-groups have similarly spoken about "Christian" same-sex marriages, doesn't make it a norm. Because it wasn't a norm in Christianity nor was it accepted. It may have not been the norm in India, doesn't mean that it wasn't accepted. >Haha, nooo. No agragarian society is matriarchal in nature, and even matrilineal and matrifocal societies are male-centric. You are like an SJW, but you try to justify it by lying about historical India and other cultures. You sure haven't been to North East India have you? I wasn't even making a reference to Vedic culture regarding this. India was patriarchal, no doubt. But we were not as harsh as other groups were! >Like I said all my ebooks/bookmarks are on my laptop which I don't have with me rn, I promise I'll PM/reply to you w/ it tomorrow. Don't worry! Good luck! [SEP] You sure haven't been to North East India have you? I wasn't even making a reference to Vedic culture regarding this. India was patriarchal, no doubt. But we were not as harsh as other groups were!
-Hospitals charge a ton because insurance will pay for it. When hospitals charge you $45,000 for a routine procedure, they know the insurance company will bargain with them to about $10,000 and call it even. It's a made up number meant to open up negotiation. However, the whole procedure actually cost $600. Somewhere down the line, someone made a 1566% profit off of you getting hurt, and it wasn't the doctors and it wasn't the insurance companies. [SEP] wasn't the insurance companies
->Uhm, no, this is the only robust way. It's robust because it allows your editor to think that code in the file is different from what it actually is? >It should never be out of sync, any change you make must be reflected in the REPL state immediately. It gets out of sync very easily. Say, I define a function and send it to the REPL. Then I delete or rename it, unless I remember to explicitly remove it from the REPL state it'll stay there. Or maybe I move the function to a different place in the source and now it needs a forward declaration, there's no way for the REPL to tell. >It might be a bad idea to separate these things. I disagree. >And more crippled, limiting the abstractions you can work with. If that's what you believe then Clojure is not a language for you. It's really that simple. [SEP] It's robust because it allows your editor to think that code in the file is different from what it actually is?
-The source is great but KotL in particular is heavily skewed by the tendency of worse players to just blast down the creep wave which steals the farm from the allied carry. A good KotL will stack and farm the jungle to get a fast mek/force staff and work towards his aghanims. KotL himself does need a few items though I feel. The graph is a normalized winrate compared to cs/min - its clever stuff. Its saying how much should your hero be farming compared to the other heroes. With heroes like Omni, ogre and earthshaker they should be getting their money by assist/kill gold not by farming, and those that choose to farm instead are letting their team down and forcing them to fight 4v5 without the amazing skills that you offer. I would say all of those are more item dependent than the classic 5's: crystal maiden / shadow demon / jakiro / rubick. [SEP] KotL in particular is heavily skewed by the tendency of worse players to just blast down the creep wave
-> They are procedural (no, they're not) How are they not? > He has no idea how to unit test procedural code Of course you can test procedural code, but it can be much harder when you can't, for example, easily mock out internal state. > If your application consists entirely of static methods it will be hard to unit test (Sure maybe, but that is kind of a ridiculous argument against static methods) Why is that ridiculous? Testability is a very important metric of code. > Most static methods would be better off as instance methods of one of their arguments (A matter of taste, definitely not a reason that "static methods are bad". ) It may be a matter of taste that a *particular* static method would be better off non-static. But it's not a matter of taste that the majority of static methods would be better as non-static methods. This is a hypothesis that may or may not be true, but is testable as long as you believe in the methodologies of modern software engineering research. > Also note that people are managing to unit test things just fine in languages like Haskell where a lot of the codebase is going to be made up of 'static methods'. They're not really static methods for this purpose though, because testing is all about getting software in a particular state (and then verifying this state is as expected). Functional programming is so testable because it (ideally) has no state! If a function f is totally defined by its arguments a, b and c, then we can simply test f with every permutation of a, b, and c, perhaps pruning this space if it is too large. Non-OO procedural code is hard to test because its state is not as easily encapsulated as OO and functional (which of course has no state). [SEP] They're not really static methods for this purpose though, because testing is all about getting software in a particular state (and then verifying this state is as expected). Functional programming is so testable because it (ideally) has no state! If a function f is totally defined by its arguments a, b and c, then we can simply test f with every permutation of a, b, and c, perhaps pruning this space if it is too large.
-Possibly make it so that you can only put one prison pearl per container (chest, furnace, etc)? That way you really need to want someone imprisoned forever for it to be cost effective. Maybe make it so that only alts can be in the same chest also, if that is possible? [SEP] Possibly make it so that you can only put one prison pearl per container (chest, furnace, etc)?
-I'm really digging Dr. Adam Back's 2 mb now, 4 mb in 2 years, 8 mb in 4 years, and then re-evaluate proposal. It's a cautious and measured approach to scaling up the block size, and makes sure we don't risk decentralization. 4 years is an eternity in Bitcoin, and who knows, by then we may have working implementations of other more efficient scaling mechanisms, such as Lightning Network. [SEP] 4 years is an eternity in Bitcoin
-Don't work for them. Start your own business. You are forcing your beliefs upon them and you went to them for help (job). The irony of this is gold. [SEP] Don't work for them. Start your own business.
-"Already being tried for a crime"? What crime is that? "Terms of her release"? No, if she commits new Contempt she can be rejailed. "The judge wouldn't have said it if it weren't true" A disarmingly cute inanity, thanks. "You're a mindless child...." Physician, heal thyself.... [SEP] What crime is that?
-Oh ok, the logic flow makes more sense now. However, I did not argue that "I want Asian comics to do, ideally, 0% Asian jokes". The problem is that Asian comedians can't really succeed as of now without having most of their repertoire being Asian jokes, because the play on Asian stereotypes are almost expected of them. There really isn't a choice. My ideal would be that both the 80%s and the 0%s are able to find success. > And I pointed out that the comics that Asians most enjoy seeing are actually people that do a lot of Asian jokes. How did you conclude this???? Why do you say Asians prefer cheap Asian jokes more than just a clever comedy? Asians (probably we are talking about western Asian immigrants only) liking Russell Peter might be because of the shared immigrant experience. Or maybe it is because all other Asian comedian who refrain from Asian jokes are shut down in their infancy, so the most popular comedian is the one who make the joke in the most relatively respectful way and they can identify the closest to compared to all existing comedians. [SEP] I did not argue that "I want Asian comics to do, ideally, 0% Asian jokes".
-And they're kidding themselves if they think that no one can make their own website similar to reddit. This ain't like cable companies where breaking into the market you need millions upon millions of dollars, you just gotta be a decent web dev with some spare cash.. [SEP] And they're kidding themselves if they think that no one can make their own website similar to reddit.
-Not me personally, but I have seen someone leave a job in under 1 hour. Shitty night shift, stocking shelves for a terrible company ^cough Kmart ^cough. The guy decided within the first 30 minutes that he didn't like the job and told the manager he would be leaving. Manager tells him that the store is locked down until at least 5AM. 20 minutes go by and no one can seem to find the dude and then all of a sudden the alarm system for the store starts going off. He hated the job so much, he forcefully broke open the door and just walked out into the night. [SEP] Manager tells him that the store is locked down until at least 5AM.
-Well, it's seems you have a lot more experience than me. My girl is seeking intimacy more than sex, and marriage is a thing that will only happen to get things right with the kids. She does have a loving father, and my parents are cool too, so this fits your theory. I don't know, I'm still not convinced that being bad is such a good thing to have a relationship. Maybe it works better for one night stands or starting relationships, I have very little experience there. Even if all you say is true, I'd still prefer to look for a girl that appreciates me being good instead of trying to keep her with bad attitude. [SEP] Even if all you say is true, I'd still prefer to look for a girl that appreciates me being good instead of trying to keep her with bad attitude.
-Haha I love this. The first country to win it twice (after 2008). Beat Japan after penalties, after barely holding on to a draw. I'd like to imagine government officials don't know how to handle actually winning something after faking winning every imaginable prize. [SEP] I'd like to imagine government officials don't know how to handle actually winning something after faking winning every imaginable prize.
-http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2458136,00.asp Here you go, I'll do the work for you so you can realize how bad your reading comprehension is. Just because Titanfall is the best selling game of the month doesn't mean the global amount of software sales for the xbox one is higher. [SEP] Here you go, I'll do the work for you so you can realize how bad your reading comprehension is.
-But isn't the majority of their electricity produced from coal-fired plants? Out of the frying pan . . . [SEP] Out of the frying pan . . .
+They sell a solid experience to people who don't know or care what's under the hood - and that's perfectly fine, because most people shouldn't need to know or care. The iPod was absolutely positively NOT revolutionary, though, in any way other than as a fashion icon. If you don't believe that then you didn't follow that technology even a tiny bit back then. The iPod did absolutely nothing new besides the "wheel", and quite frankly compared to the interface my Dell DJ had, the iPod's actually sucked! I won't protect or tout the goodness of Dell in very many situations, I normally think Dell stinks, but the DJ was much simpler to use than the iPod - especially creating "on the go playlists"... I'm not a mac hater. I grew up on the Apple 2, the Apple 2gs, the Mac Classic, the Mac 2ci, etc... Apple was my introduction into computing... [SEP] As someone who has used both platforms extensively, I can tell you that the Mac provides me absolutely no compelling reasons to pay the price difference.
+Somewhat obscurely implied in my comment was my opinion that they are stupid. The whole concept of p-zombies is essentially part of a debate on eliminative materialism. But they beg the question (which is funny because if I recall they were first proposed by an anti-eliminativist). If eliminativism is false, then a zombie cannot be both indistinguishable from a human and lack subjective experience, because subjective experience informs certain aspects of human culture (for an obvious example, philosophy of mind). Then a zombie would never invent the hard problem, for sheer lack of relevant data. The only way around this would be to have zombies specially programmed to talk about subjective experience, basically a crude hack in their brains, which would obviously make them distinguishable from a human. TL;DR zombies are stupid. [SEP] I am very familiar with the concept of p-zombies.
+To be fair, to provide more muscle for the USA pacific block to counter the rise of China. The Japanese navy on the other hand, as far as I'm aware, has been a well equipped and powerful force for much longer. [SEP] the SDF only really got beefed up relatively recently
+The game has certainly changed since those teams really earned their "elite" status. I think that of those teams, it is the most difficult for me to imagine Texas staying down forever. With the geographical and financial advantages that they have, it boggles the mind that they continue to struggle the way that they are. [SEP] I don't think it is a given that teams like Michigan, Texas and Penn State will be elite again.
+The fact of the matter still remains: No matter how much good it does for society, the coercive and non consensual taking of a persons property or money by another person or group of people is morally wrong. End of story. Don't they teach you that stealing is wrong where you live? [SEP] Your statistics re consitenly wrong and no sources are cited. You're a sheep. Go back to your heard.
+Moxie yes. Finesse is a big maybe. Support attacks use support power to determine damage, so unless your running assault abilities in your tank LAS finesse will do nothing for you. [SEP] Edit: derp. Warrior. My bad. I was thinking engineer.
+I don't think this binary paradoxical conflict you describe is accurate. The big issues in all this are agency and power. In the past, the patriarchy (by which I mean a social power structure based on masculinity) prescribed the woman should cover up and be virginal creatures with no sexual agency. Then sexual "liberation" happened, but it really didn't liberate anyone from anything. just demands that women act and dress in a sexual manner and again removed their agency. So essentially all the paradox you mentioned aren't actually paradoxes in feminist thought but a grave misunderstanding thereof; the problem is the patriarchy is still in control, it just controls in different ways that give an illusion of liberation. [SEP] Now the patriarchy
+ [SEP] I don't understand how cops like this keep their jobs.
+God I hate the creeping backward trend. All stores used to open at Midnight, then someone made it 11, then someone else had to compete and opened at 10. [SEP] Now some places don't even close and just "start" BF deals at 6 p.m. or something equally ridiculous.
+>Martin Luther King, Jr. was never a registered Republican. Is there any actual hard evidence either way to support this? >This is a Republican myth based on the supposition by MLK's niece that he might have been a Republican because the southern Democratcs in the 1950s were so racist. Regardless of if he was or wasn't a republican, the video that I've seen of his niece didn't take the form of a supposition, but was stated as an outright fact. Now you can certainly take the stance that she was incorrect if you want, but we should at least honestly represent how she presented her claim. >However, MLK's own son categorically stated that he was never a Republican. So we believe the word of one family member, but not the word of another. That seems a little hypocritical... >The interesting thing is that all those seats held by racist Democrats in the 1950s are now firmly held by dog-whistle blowing racist Republicans. Now you are just making vicious, generalized accusations that I promise you don't have any evidence to support. You disagree? Then I challenge you to prove that every seat is now held by "dog-whistle blowing racist Republicans." Can you do that? Yeah I didn't think so. Now it is becoming clear that you are either a troll of someone whose mind is so poisoned by bias that your opinion is less than useless. >Just like stating that the "right to work for starvation wages" is somehow a good thing. Even more bullshit. Let's play a game. Then tell me how many of those are deaths are caused by excessively low wages as opposed to parental neglect or mental retardation or clinical conditions. [SEP] How about you tell me the total amount of people in the US that ACTUALLY starve to death in a year.
+and of course Rift will have Touch controllers in December. But i agree, Honey Select is the best there is but that doesnt mean its good. [SEP] There is a couple of games with leap motion support
+Orient the long board lengthwise from left to right so the plunge cuts are perpendicular to your body. Adjust the router to the desired depth of cut. Place a straight edge clamped to the board at the location you wish to place to dado cut, measured appropriately to allow for the distance from the centre of the router bit to the edge of the router base. I would not have used a router table for the leg placement at all. Side note: I have the exact same router and table as you. [SEP] Do you ever find that the black piece in the centre of the table needs constant adjustments?
+I think so, yes. [SEP] I wouldn't know how one can transition from a supinated palm grip (as in chin ups) to a muscle up. In fact, I think that's impossible.
+Your live isn't based on statistics but on your own choices. The fact that males are traditionaly the sole earner doesnt mean your chances of being the stay at home parent are lower. The way your household manages income is only determined bij you and your SO. . It also doesnt mean only one person per family is able to have a job. [SEP] Furthermore going back to one earner making enough to support a family doesn't mean going back to the old gender roles
+Yeah but neither of those launched with more than 1 or 2 colours,unlike the 64 with about 5 or 6 different ones I believe. The colours on the 64 controllers were more vibrant and caught the eye better too. Going to a mates house? 99% chance he has a black Xbox One controller. See where I'm coming from? [SEP] Going to a mates house in 1995? 20% chance he had a grey 64 controller.
+Violence isn't always morally wrong. It's to hammer home the idea that laws are quite serious things which should not be passed frivolously, and that you consider this particular law so good and right that you are okay with violently forcing someone to obey it. [SEP] The point of the argument is not to be opposed to every government policy.
+Sorry, I wasn't raised that way. My mom is a certified first responder. We stop, for everything. She saved a pregnant woman who went into a diabetic coma while driving. She helped a little old man wandering around with bloody hands and no memory of anything. We always stop for accidents if there aren't emergency vehicles on scene yet, no matter where we're going. And I *did* step forward to help out a guy who had just been thrown around the corner from a fight. I've had the hero instinct kind of burned into me. I can't imagine having any reaction *but* to help people, because it's always been a part of who we are. And even if I were to panick in a momentary test, there's no way I would be able to walk past a rape, or any other crime, and not help, without *hating myself for the rest of my life*. Even if there were weaponry or a gang involved, I would at least call the police immediately and [SEP] attempt to find someone who could help.
+, I think we have to take Yanis Varoufakis' comments with a pinch of salt. I'm a fan of his economic views, but his political views seem pretty tainted of late. [SEP] Although I am a Keynesian and - it should go without saying - anti-austerity
+> However viewers would have been left with little to do but switch the kettle on this weekend as Netflix suffered an outage lasting nearly three hours. Surges in power requirements are being replaced by surges in bandwidth as people binge of newly available shows. [SEP] This was due to the release of the new Marvel series Luke Cage, I believe.
+> it is comparable considering we are simply talking about good players on shit teams, so it's absolutely comparable lol. EU being relatively weaker than KR does not change that Rekkles had a useless team just like Faker did therefore he looked worse compared to other competition. >it is comparable considering we are simply talking about good players on shit teams, so it's absolutely comparable lol Not when the context makes the comparison null and void. [SEP] Rekkles wasn't even the best player on Alliance... Faker is far and away the best player on SKT.
+LA Galaxy, LAFC, San Jose, Sacramento, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Orlando, Atlanta, and Miami could all be available for home games in early December and February....maybe Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver as well. I really don't care if the season starts in July or February, but June needs to be taken off and the Gold Cup needs to be moved to June. Playing through the international absences for World Cup, Gold Cup, Copa Lib, and maybe the Euro Cup has to stop. . Every year a few teams could claim their season was ruined by international call-ups and those teams likely lose some fans. How much longer can it go on? How am I supposed to take the league seriously, when they don't even take themselves seriously by playing through these tournaments? [SEP] The only way to do that is play more games in the winter
+yeah my girlfriend broke up with me and said similar things about me. Part of the reason was "I wasn't texting her much" and "didn't seem like i cared much". This was why we she said broke up. There was a much more profound issue, but these are things that come up to the surface and serve as their 'complaints'. I'm not taking it too seriously, just looking at it as me not maintaining my frame properly and not handling a situation well enough. For those curious, she developed herpes 1 month into our relationship, and I handled it poorly and we broke because of it. [SEP] She thought I was cheating and the relationship was not going to last past a month when an STD develops and little trust has been built and the guy handles it poorly.
+In a way, the Roman Empire didn't really split, and it is more useful to think of it as a singular entity with two different administrative structures after 395 CE. I would love to hear the answer to your other question. There was a Byzantine "renaissance" in the eleventh century that reemphasized classical learning of Christian, but that was almost more of a "Hellenic" revival than a Roman one. [SEP] The emperors of the East and West were both related to each other and rendered each other aid.
+Right, how could I forget about all that other stuff he's done. Like and maintain Bush's absurd wars. [SEP] drive us into a depression
+Having driven in the UK this holiday I think it is a bit different to other countries when it comes to roundabouts, but nonetheless pretty easy to understand. The car obviously not only is at fault a 100% here, he also after he hits the biker, which is far worse. [SEP] tries to get away
+What I got from it: seemingly would vote Republican no matter what. Even though 68% say they believe Trump has made unwanted sexual advances toward women, is seemingly perfectly OK with that. >.> [SEP] 40-31 percent of the country
+> No, consensual, casual sex is not damaging No it's not. You're right. However, the types that constantly engage in this behavior with different men tend to be already damaged, and the multiple partners she keeps getting with just solidifies these poor character traits that lead to these decisions. > And what about the men that sleep with them? If it's an actual slut? We try to keep it secret or just to our bros. We don't like to publicly announce we to fulfill our urges. Sluts aren't our prefferred fuck, but we'll do it if our options our limited. > I really dont get this whole "ill stick my dick in what lets me, but afterwards ill judge the shit out of them for it. Im really a nice guy though." contradiction. I actually have no problems with sluts. I'm just pointing out that I'd never date the type of personality that is a slut. I love sluts. They make last call at the bar really easy. > your double standards I'm sorry, but that's life. There are going to be double standards between the genders. Believe it or not, men and women are different beyond just a chromosome. Some double standards are unfair, and others make sense. I'm sorry you don't like the fact that men and women are different and have different expectations by society but there are. [SEP] had to fuck a slut
+The diameters do not vary across substance, but . It's just saying that the steel industry typically uses the gauge label that the wire is most likely going to be used for. It not like they would use gun gauges for copper wire... As long as you stick with a consistent gauge scale, 12 gauge wire should be the same no matter what it is made out of. [SEP] 10 gauge AWG might not be the same as 10 gauge MWG
+The issue that I have with carbon tax credits is they can be bought and sold (at least the version that I've read can be). If a company figures out that it's cheaper for them to pay for tax credits and pollute, then they will. If they are expensive than they may choose to do it illegally. [SEP] Maybe if it was done in a way that would gradually pressure companies to innovate cleaner methods of doing things, it could be good, but then the company would patent whatever technology is used in it and that could have a wide array of different, unpredictable outcomes.
+If you are worried about socialists hijacking and destroying our ideology then look at fabian society logo and step up your game really quick. No much time left for /r/Anarcho_Capitalism if they zergrush as this sub is gone. [SEP] We are a subset of libertarians. The term is being hijacked.
+The leagues were interesting but 2.0 was only interesting for new content, in 2.0 which made the game much less interesting. I stopped playing about 2 weeks ago and just lurk on the forums looking for something enticing to tempt me back. [SEP] clear speed and build diversity was crushed
+I agree that the rules blatantly conflict, but . [SEP] messaging the mods for clarification is a much better response than running to /r/undelete and screaming CONSPIRACY
+ [SEP] How lame would it be if the way we discover aliens is due to some stars having a bit of a wiggle in their spectrum
+ [SEP] His special does 15K damage, it won't kill most teams. Even better than poison is the Dreadnaught ship that saves you one special animation and one crew slot.
+Write for Business Insider? As for that Colonel; I honestly don't know what his thought process is - he says it's payload is low, yet at over 18,000lb its payload greater than any of the jets it replaces, he says it has a short range, yet it has a greater combat radius (>600nmi) than any of the jets it replaces, etc. and look at **empirical** data; learn what it means, what different metrics are used, learn how to convert apples-to-oranges comparisons to apples-to-apples, etc. [SEP] Instead of linking to articles, why don't you go and do your own research
+Anyone remember the May 21, 2011 Christians? Despite the fact that they were in the news for only about a month, the group had been around for over twenty years. I would know - I was raised in it. One of the horrible aspects of May 21st is that people were commanded to sell of their houses, quit their jobs, take their kids out of school, ect because continuing a normal instead of preparing for the rapture proved someone to be unsaved. I wouldn't know where to begin - my family knew several families that sold everything they owned and decided to live in cars and "spread the word." Almost everyone quit their jobs. I know one woman who drove a school bus. She handed out religious tracks to all of the elementary students on what she thought was her last day. It probably was on the account that parents probably rang the school up about the crazy pamphlets she was handing out and how it scared the students. There were also numerous divorces. One spouse would think the whole thing was crazy, pick up, and leave. One woman's husband took their child and left, and after the whole May 21st fiasco she still couldn't find them. I don't know if she ever has. That really broke my heart. I remember crying over both my dog and cat, and not being able to sleep because of what God was supposedly going to do and how it was going to hurt my best friends. I asked God to just do it quickly. I didn't quit my job (my parents were not happy about that because it made it seem like I didn't have faith that the world was going to end), but I dropped out of school, and gave away ALL of my money to the group. There were few cases (at least that I know of) that involved people running up debt. Mostly because doing so "proved" someone was unsaved. I picked up after it all happened. I got two jobs to try and make up for the money I lost, I worked my ass off in community college and am now in the university of my dreams, and am trying to transition into a normal life. It's very difficult. I was raised in a cult and it's impossible to relate to people sometimes. Religiously, I couldn't be better. I am probably too cynical about religion, but I feel good going to bed each night, being an atheist. I feel so much better and life is looking up. I've dramatically changed. Everyone else varies though. There are plenty of people who are trying to figure out what happened and plan for the next date of the rapture. These people will ALWAYS be around. For the most part people are just trying to get by - get what jobs they can and take care of their kids. I know a lot of the younger people are relieved, and feel guilty to feel relieved. (Feeling relieved means that you didn't actually want it to happen, which means that you don't trust in God's will, which means you're unsaved and going to hell). I think I struggle less internally than most of the younger people I know. Most are trying to still be some sort of Christian and make some sort of life out of the mess. It's all very, very sad. Chances are though, it's the worse event that will happen (or not happen) in our lives. Whenever I'm having a shit day I try to remember that. EDIT: I should mention that I am not quite 100% better. Religiously speaking, I am better off than most of the other young people. Most of them are trying to reconcile and still believe in God or bits of the May 21st theory, ect while I'm religiously over all of it. But as far as my health mentally, socially, and even sexually I am.....not really all the way there. I'm working on it, but there's a lot of shit to work through after more than 20 years. That's one of the reasons I'm always trying to track down people who went through similar events that I did. I feel like we can relate to each other in ways that others don't quite get. Also, I can't really tell my new friends - this is a lot to throw on someone out of no where. It's a lot of baggage. I'm really the only one in my family who left, so it's a bit lonely, ya know? Also, not that important, but I'm a woman. [SEP] There was a lot of discussion about what to do with pets - I know one man who put down his healthy dog.
+BY minor League Attendance the A's should move to Sacramento. [SEP] The Rays should move to either Charlotte, NC or Indianapolis IN.
+That doesn't mean I think of every GDI that way. [SEP] And there is a reason people think of GDI's as pussies too.
+But free trade with the rUK is a significant downgrade from what we would have as a member of the UK and will mean significant barriers to trade for over 60% of our exports and imports. Financial services (just under 15% of the UK's GDP and a similar proportion of the UK's tax revenue) is a whole load of different industries that are listed as one. We're seeing that now, as some are expected to take a hit from Brexit, whereas others are seeing record growth. Finance firms were the some of the largest donors to *both* the Remain and Leave side. This makes the industry a lot more diverse than one raw material. [SEP] Being in the UK's single market is pretty important for Scotland. Moreso than being in the EU's.
+ [SEP] Especially since Jojo and Rexxar got 25% nerfs to the exact same thing...
+To be fair, it's come a long way. Most major distributions allow you to simply install a package and Graphics Drivers automagically work (Debian, Fedora, Arch). I remember 6/7 years ago having to hunt down the proper . God damn, that was such a pain. Most hardware nowadays (<5 years old) should work out of the box. [SEP] network adapter drivers
+>Supressing ideas because they cause bad feelings is retarded. It is pure censorship with weak reasoning. Suppressing women's sexuality because it causes men to feel insecure is retarded. It is pure selfishness with weak reasoning. >Tell me your number out of curiosity, are you ashamed? No, I'm not ashamed. , so I've had only two partners, both within LTRs. Have I been called a slut numerous times anyway for reasons not even relating to sex? Yeah. "Slut" and other terms like "whore" are used specifically on women to make them feel less valuable and worthwhile, even if they're not doing anything overtly sexual. I've been called a slut by girls I didn't even know, and by guys I turned down. A woman's sexual nature is usually the first thing someone attacks when they want to hurt her, and this is both a double-standard and a serious problem for young women who don't know how to defend themselves against it. It's a serious problem because slut-shaming causes bullying and social ostracization, depression, and in some cases even suicide. And it's all completely preventable, the only thing you have to do is not shame women for liking sex the way men like sex. We're human, we need to like sex to propagate the species. Women liking sex is not going to go away. [SEP] I find it difficult to touch and be touched by new people
+let yourself drift off.... its part of the process. the human brain will constantly chatter away, yes it will get quieter and less frequent. embrace it! it means your meditating correctly. dont give in :) [SEP] no one will ever have an hour of total silence unless they have died.
+>You refuse to accept the historical fact that extra-marital sex was widespread throughout human history I'm not accepting this because it's not an historical fact. Extra-marital sex happened, of course -- but "widespread"? What do you mean by "widespread"? Where is your evidence? >You rationalize your rejection by asserting that the only women who had sex outside of marriage were concubines. I never said this. >Reputable historical sources were cited Where? Telling me to look at /r/AskHistorians is not a "reputable historical source." >The point I have made over and over again, which you could not rebuke thus far, is the reality that what you call "casual sex" or "promiscuity" has been a persistent, ever-present part of human nature that was only briefly suppressed or driven into secrecy by Catholic dogma. 1. I'm not sure why the terms "casual sex" and "promiscuity" are in quotation marks: these are terms with clear meaning. 2. Attributing an opposition to casual sex exclusively to Catholicism is historically ignorant. What about the Jews? The Orthodox? The Muslims? All of the tribes across the globe who have practiced slut-shaming? 3. To return to the first point made in this response, it has not yet been demonstrated that casual sex was rampant in ancient societies. The risk of pregnancy was very real. Women were not yet treated as fully human. Promiscuous behavior was ubiquitously condemned, even in Roman society. What you're doing is what we in philosophy would understand as assertion-making rather than argument-making. >They are going to have sex no matter how hard people like you try to tell them not to in useless abstinence-only sex ed programs. (There are hundreds, but even *one* suffices to demonstrate my point.) Yes? Then it *is* possible to dissuade young adults from having casual sex. Your biological fatalism regarding promiscuity simply isn't backed by the historical record. Let me go over the three main claims I've made: 1. Birth control is far more reliable and available than it's been in the past. 2. Having casual sex in the past was a far riskier proposition than it is today. 3. Consequently from [1] and [2], people today are having far more sex than they did in the past. Feel free to address any of these points specifically. [SEP] Is there a single society in human history that has successfully discouraged young adults from having casual sex?
+Yes, *every single American, over 300 million people,* just sit on their asses. Fuck you. You know nothing about our country except for what you hear, and I'll tell you right now the only news that actually makes it is the bad. [SEP] It gives an unfair view of the country.
+I personally think that the reason Jones had much better success then Morris is because he is a good pass catching back too, whereas morris is not. Because of this, when defenses see Morris in the backfield they stack 8 in the box and assume it's a run (because once again, Morris can't catch a cold butt naked in Alaska), whereas when they see Jones in the backfield (who is an unproven rookie) they think pass. Even Washington's coach in the press conference mentioned this as the reason he mixed their carries. It is an attempt to keep defenses guessing. I am a fantasy owner of both and am scared because I am convinced they will both get split carries all season because [SEP] 1. Morris is too good and consistent to be a backup, 2. even if Jones is better, Morris is not third down back material (because of his brick hands), which would make Jones a 3 down receiver which would mean Morris never playing, and 3. Jones is too good to just be a third down back.
+> The very thing you see as "civilized society" is inherently uncivilized I have civilized society in the associations I keep. I spent years building those associations. My interactions with government haven't been civilized, as government sees fit to act via coercion and deception. BTW, I see no difference between corporate and civil government anymore. They became the same thing in the 20th century. [SEP] I prefer neighbors that act like neighbors. I don't care what other people call them.
+We're pretty much normal guys. We get up, go to work, pay our bills, It's not bad here in Dallas. Most LGBT here are moderate leaning. [SEP] and respect other peoples opinions and beliefs.
+The dog: Fullmetal Alchemist (it's great) The catgirl: , licensed as "Cat Planet Cuties" in the US (it's shit) The manga girl: Yotsuba&! (it's awesome) The crying kid: Pokemon (it's nostalgia) The guy with the sunglasses: I have no idea [SEP] Asobi ni iku yo!
+Yeah, because I dont have to. Theres a whole subreddit for talking about Eva. . You're the only one out of the loop, and I dont feel responsible for explaining things to you. [SEP] The truth is most people disagree with you
+It should not allow someone to become a canadian citizen if they do not follow these values and adopt a canadian identity. By doing so it is destroying the identity of canadians, dividing them based on values and making them into currency. Good talk about tribe and identity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7vGntRbFe8 If you want the canadian identity to be reduced to being a consumer, who lives north of 'murica' then you would have no problems with destroying the canadian identity and tribe. [SEP] Canada is a mostly a christian/secular country with their own values and identity.
+Thanks for the tips. I doubt ass play is possible. I have begged for anal for a couple months and I'm not getting anywhere. But the handcuffs combined with the flavored lube may do wonders. . Maybe the cuffs will give her some control. [SEP] My SO complains that her throat get sore and she chokes when I get close to finishing and hold her head down
+for treason. [SEP] He should be hanged
+> They've already said *many* times they aren't dropping support for Mac and Linux. I'll believe it when I see it. [SEP] I thought Minecraft PE was already written in C++. All they've done so far is make it run on Windows 10 and that's about it.
+Now I know this post will be unpopular, but people who say that the healthcare system should be totally free and the government should provide everybody insurance and there should be no out of pocket costs for anybody in the country... well that idea really makes me angry. You only have to look at what happened in Europe and is still happening in Europe to some extent to know what will happen if we just start spending money again. Certain countries in Europe almost completely went under and if it were not for other countries bailing them out they would have.. and then those countries almost went down as well. The government will never have enough money to pay for everything. If you make every state school in the country free for anybody who wants to go, it would make it far more competitive to get in resulting in less people going. The private universities would likely go out of business and you'd probably end up having to pay professors less. Back on topic, I do agree that the medical costs of the US are high. Its a fact that they are higher here than they are in most other locations across the world. And there are three reasons for that. One is a good reason and I gladly would pay more because of it, the other two are bad reasons and they need to be looked at. The first reason is that when you take the whole healthcare system as a whole, lump it together then find the average that somebody pays, I'd gladly may more money for medicines and new procedures knowing that that money will go to a company that is spending billions on research to improve things. The second reason, and one that needs to be looked at is: So many insurance companies do not pay for preventative care. I could be in a third world country and get the flu and be clinging to life and need to be transported back to the states to be looked after. The insurance company will pay every single fee to put me and those traveling with me on a private medical jet and then pay for me to be put in a hospital when I get home. However, paying for the flu shot would save them a lot of money verus the event I were to actually get the flu. The third I have first hand experience with and is a big deal which is why i saved it for last. My dad is a doctor. You should see how much money he pays in medical malpractice insurance. Its more money in that one bill alone than most people make in a year... and it has saved him a few times. People are way to quick to sue doctors and the laws governing what you can sue for need to be tightened up. I'll give you an example: A doctor a few towns over from me was out to dinner with his wife and the doctor saw somebody choking. They could not get it out so the doctor stabbed a ball point pen into the ladies throat in order to save her. She would have died if that doctor was not in the restaurant. However that lady did not like the scar on her neck and sued the doctor for $500,000, won, and the insurance had to pay for it. Stories like that are things that need to be addressed at a equal level as "My flu shot cost me $35 dollars and I think the government should have paid that instead" Because as long as doctors need top ay tens of thousands of dollars in insurance to protect themselves, the prices of those doctors are not going to come down. [SEP] you have to account for the fact that a lot more research happens in the US than in most places around the world, and that accounts a lot towards the higher average cost.
+Successful and intelligent black women are single for basically the same reason OP is having trouble. We may like someone, but majority of the time the attraction is not reciprocated. Albeit you learn to be more open minded because your options are very small considering most guys aren't attracted to you. When you look at it, white women are essentially universally desired, so they can pick whomever they want without a problem usually. Whereas when you're not as desired you really don't have room to be as selective unless you plan on being alone. [SEP] Which also explains why a lot of black women who don't date outside their race are still single.
+The only negative I've discovered is that . But you can still get loans, free checking, savings accounts, and check cards. [SEP] most do not offer business accounts
+ [SEP] Why is he resigning from congress in addition to stepping down as speaker?
+I agree, but to be honest, it is exhausting to debate with people who quickly agree that the SLoT explains why everyone else is wrong, but that their idea is still correct. > science progresses one funeral at a time This phrase has mostly outlived it's validity. There are very few people who dominate their field that completely today. Honestly, you can get traction if you have a theory and experimental evidence, it's just that [SEP] most outsiders don't bother with both.
+I dunno, I'm older. Seeing what's happened to election season enthusiasm every four years has led me to believe that a whole lot of nothing will happen. We had all this saber rattling with the tea party in 2008, people were talking revolution and a new third party -- Where is Sarah Palin, the favorite candidate of the tea party? The problem is that these people hate and distrust the government so much that they're unable to work within the system to make the kind of changes they want. That is key. All they're talking about is how corrupt the media is, how the election is rigged, how their own party is abandoning them -- it's a total "us vs the world" mentality. That's not going to lead to any real movement politically. You're going to see some noise from the fringe alt-right, but people who band together over their hate for a president have traditionally never fared well. [SEP] where is the tea party today?
+Knowing how to solve problems efficiently and streamlined has to do with your knowledge of algorithms or Language specific constructs that are efficient and streamlined, so it comes with time and just pure learning by heart is no help ( and then adapting that solution structure). [SEP] you need experience in mapping a problem onto another problem you already know the solution for
+I think the general population likes Eminem because he's fucking good. I don't think Eminem's mass appeal is really that he's white, but more that he's super fucking talented. The biggest artists (Tupac, Biggie, Jay Z, Kanye, etc) break cultural barriers based on talent. Although when it comes to guys like Watsky and Hoodie Allen, it probably has a lot to do with race and background. I'm honestly not convinced that's a bad thing either. [SEP] People are drawn to music they identify with. Hoodie Allen is gonna be talking about some suburban shit, so my sister loves him. My sister isn't going to be riding around listening to Pusha talking about slinging bricks.
+ [SEP] Easy for you to say. As a JG fan, that 33-race winless streak last year wasn't easy to get over.
+ [SEP] you know you can just drag them to the side to make them smaller... right?
+> That, as a nation, we only care about what happens when we don't think people deserved the violence done upon them. It happens when people don't understand the motives behind violence. >When there are shootings in run-down areas where drugs and crime are rampant, we have a underlying, subconscious feeling that it comes with the territory. Because there are recognizable motives: the drug trade, ensuing gang rivalries, poverty related crime like robbery, etc. >Suddenly a bunch of movie-goers in surburbia CO get killed by a crazy person and like The Onion points out, we go into our highly refined post-catastrophe mode Because it's seemingly senseless with no easy-to-grasp motive. >we won't be able to develop ways to prevent this so long as this is our national knee-jerk reaction. [SEP] Exactly what ways are there to prevent this? As much as you've mentioned "dealing with broader issues" you've failed to actually articulate any.
+> Solo content would have to be tuned toward a middle-of-the-road healer in cleric stance. > I'd really prefer they fix the current social elements; several of the current systems are so hysterically bad for an MMO that it hurts. I really enjoy this game a lot, but sooooo many of the systems and blockings in place are just absolutely awful for a multiplayer experience. I agree with the latter, but they don't really have much to do with what's being mentioned. Being able to play with others more outside of raids doesn't really help you find competent raiders. A lot of servers have people shuffling around and kicking members every day in search of their golden goose which they still can't find. When it comes down to it, I think it's just that the gap between casual and hardcore content is too small, but the skill level required is huge. > Randomizing mechanics is, generally, not the best course of action. I think fights with randomized mechanics are much more fun. Moggle, for example, is much more interesting to me because things happen in a chaotic order (unless you play tank and sit in a corner, that part needed work). > Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but isn't this precisely what Savage already does? A lot of people don't find Savage to be fun, especially the groups who have hit a wall. Personally I enjoy raiding, but it would probably be more enjoyable all around if they released more bosses per tier. Instead of going from difficulty 1,3,8,10; they could have a slower and steady increase. More variety and more "accomplishment" points will keep it more entertaining for a while. And people who raid competitively have more races to win. [SEP] Or just have separate instances for each job. Tank instances deal more damage, healer instances have things to protect, and DPS instances have time limits. Other things work too, but they can cater the content to the class.
+I'm fine with a limit of about a million a year. The rest of that money should be going towards the workers in the company. "You" shouldn't be profiting massively while millions of people are worried whether or not they can afford to live for the next 30 days. > But then what happens if I'm in independent software developer that suddenly has a huge hit on his hands, like Notch had with Minecraft, and by some stroke of luck have made several million dollars in a month. I'm not ripping off money that should be shared with employees because I don't have any employees to exploit. If that is the case, then sure, take your money. I don't have a problem with that, as long as you're not actively stepping on everyone just to get a little more. >So what happens to all that extra money? Does anything I make after $20,000 just vanish and go to the government just because I made it all at once instead of over a period of time? Does that sound fair to you? [SEP] ...really should've let me answer before typing this one, huh?
+Agreed a whack-job could make them, but wouldn't it be possible that a jacketed round would cause a spark, or even oil on the bullet from the shooters fingers could start an O2 compression explosion caused by the puncture, or even that the bullet itself would be tremendously hot from the friction with the barrel (any shooter who's ever burned his leg while shooting from rest can attest to how hot the barrel gets with only a few rounds). Again, I don't find the idea likely, but "its absurd that a high-powered bullet into a gigantic tin can filled with O2 & jet fuel creates an explosion" is not convincing to me. [SEP] Why do we need incendiary rounds?
+You sir, are a fascist, I hope you die of malnutrition. [SEP] You are saying you'd love to constrain freedoms to further your own personal agenda?
+Not knowing your wife, I don't know how she would react. This might be a case where not telling the specifics are better. It may be a place to open up a conversation about how you can set boundaries with MIL, though. Just "yeesh, your mom, she started spewing shit at me and I didn't know how to shut her down. I ended up having to flee. Any idea on how I could handle this better next time?" [SEP] I'm not sure I'd want to know. I mean, intellectually I know my mom says all sorts of shit about me to people all the time. But actually hearing what she said... it would probably put me into a funk for days. I'd want to defend myself and explain why she's wrong. And there's nothing I can do about it because confronting her is doomed to failure.
+> It would have taken me much longer to get geared in D2 without trading, and the same is true for this game. No, that depends on what you mean by "get geared." A lot of people trading in D2 were already doing Hell Baal runs. > Nobody actually knows what the game would be like without it, it's just used as a simplistic catch-all for people not having fun. Yes, of course they do. There are other ARPGs out there that do not have central AHs. [SEP] They were already geared up to a great extent. They were searching for more gear because, for whatever reason, they wanted it, not because they needed it--huge difference.
+Why would MS need to certify their own devices? [SEP] It may well come with permanent Secure Boot.
+, taking shots at a guy upsetting the apple cart is par for the course. [SEP] Remember , for a lot of our media McG has the wrong Dublin accent to be making the kind of cash he is currently bringing in
+> My sandwich is no more logically limited than God, > though, and I would argue that omnimaxity IS logically impossible anyway. Okay good, I would probably argue the same thing. > Right. That's the point. You can swap it out with anything you want and get the same result. In terms of its name sure, but you still have all the baggage from the concept that Plantinga is arguing for. So you're not going against Plantinga's argument. You're just putting a different hat on. > Exactly. And the MOA fails for exactly the same reason. Saying that the ultimate sandwich is more limited than God is only special pleading. It isn't, since special pleading requires the distinction to be made in arbitrariness, but there's nothing arbitrary about saying that sandwich, as a physical thing, does not contain the same properties as a supposed God, which is not physical. > He's says he's only trying to prove that belief in God is "reasonable" but he doesn't demonstrate that either. Well clearly he does, since his argument is valid. > His definition of "maximal excellence" is incoherent, his premise that maximal excellence "possibly exists is undemonstrated and does not actually look logically possible and his S5 axiom is just hocus pocus - an attempt to wand wave "possible" necessity into actual necessity. We might want to deny S5, but it isn't hocus pocus even if we did. It's a complex topic in logic that I do not have the background in to fully explain. [SEP] Well of course it is, just as my circle is logically limited to not being a square.
+ [SEP] Not often, but I don't visit new reddits much these days. I know that the rate limit is strictly subreddit specific because I've seen the site admins say so in the past, however I don't feel like digging up proof, so like I said, believe whatever you want.
+that I have no clue wtf is going on right now as far as the plot/story is concerned....which seems to be about par for the course. [SEP] I'll be the first to admit
+/ Neon Genesis Evangelion / Akira / Rurouni Kenshin / Cowboy Bebop / Perfect Blue / Yu Yu Hakusho / Ghost in the Shell / Vampire Hunter D / Ninja Scroll / Grave of the Fireflies / Serial Experiments Lain / Mononoke Hime / The Irresponsible Captain Tylor / Record of Lodoss War / Bubblegum Crisis / Vampire Princess Miyu / Wicked City / Blood+ / Demon City Shinjuku / Dante's Inferno [SEP] The Vision of Escaflowne
+> This last point is the point I would appreciate if you could somehow source. I don't mean to sound like I doubt you, but there are lots of people making statements on either side of this argument, and a credible source would be enough to cmv. Direct Stream Digital has a sampling rate of 2.8 MHz If your average record needle travels at 2 kph (which is generous), then it will cover 55 cm in a second. That means the needle will need to about hit 51,000 grooves every centimeter to maintain that sampling rate. Googling tells me the size of a vinyl particle is about 1 to 100 micrometers. However, to get a sampling rate of 2.8 MHz would require a groove to be .19 micrometers wide. Of course you could speed up a record and get more data on it, but we don't play records that fast. Also, you'd lose detail due to the momentum of the needle. [SEP] The smallest possible particle of vinyl is 5 times larger than what would be required for that sampling rate. Therefore, it is physically impossible to encode that much data into a standard record.
+Main issue with running very hot though, means that these 1070 equipped machines are actually slower than the thick machines, by virtue of boost/throttling. All the aorus machines so far, and partially the gigabytes, have had subpar cooling :( compared to most of the competition. [SEP] which results in lower CPU and GPU performance
+I love how they buy them before they're even authorised to use them. Repression is a necessarily part of the austerity agenda as seen around Europe, no surprise this is happening but it won't stop the forces that seek a different world, one that doesn’t benefit the few at the expense of the many. It won't be long before they get other (in fact they’ve already got rubber bullets but they were mainly for the students and striking workers – there's a weapon for each group that contests capital or the state). [SEP] lethal weapons such as tear gas, rubber bullets and flash bangs
+When the book first came out there were many discussions regarding this. I'm on your side of this particular issue. What it comes down to, in my opinion, is that if it's Merlin it's some damn lazy writing. Jim can be lazy, but he's not that lazy. Perhaps it's one of the previous Wardens of Demonreach. Have some fun imagining who it might be. Jumping straight to Merlin is boring. [SEP] Perhaps it's Jack the Ripper.
+ [SEP] We hate bad cops, the good cops who just do their job never make the news.
+According to your thesis that one can be "terrone" without beeing labeled as slacker etc etc. I truly don't think so. And also seems to me that here everybody are thinking only, and exclusively, about the mere literal meaning, forgetting about the significant of the words....that is the main cause of argument. So, I, personally tend to do not use any of these words, even in a funny way, awake of the facts that someone could feel upset to be named like...and viceversa, I don't like to be labeled as "polentone". Even if the terms could fit my nature, or my geographycal position. [SEP] So, I can freely call all the S Italians "terroni" and there will be no problem?
+>Maybe you set the limit lower, but if you're arrested for fraud it's pretty hard to come out and get a nice job since nobody can trust you, so you'll end up being a server at Applebee's, in which your actual restitution would be roughly $0. So we don't make restitution zero dollars for people earning that little. It's won't much, but it's still something for the victims, as opposed to nothing and a big cost to society. Plus did I mention community service? Don't underestimate the importance of that! If done right, people doing community service can be a great resource. >Again, this seems to be coming from a place of ignorance. Yes, it is that easy, that's why bail and bounty hunters exist. It's that easy *when you don't take measures.* How do you sneak anywhere when you have a monitoring bracelet that records everything that you do, and as soon as you get near an airport or start to try to remove it, officers are dispatched? Answer: You don't. That's not what we're doing now, and we really shouldn't be doing that now except in *flight risk* situations. Like the ones that you are talking about. YOU are the one who is refusing to actually engage with the subject, because you seem to think that just because we aren't taking the sort of measures that I am talking about now, we can't ever take those measures. We can. And they would work, the vast majority of the time. [SEP] And they would be much cheaper than TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS A YEAR(!!!) for DECADES.
+Look, i doubt CM punk is going to be worth a damn in the cage. We really have no clue at this point. Im excited for him to prove me and everyone else wrong. [SEP] But why are people automaticly counting him out?
+Oooooooh, I see. What you meant by "horrible, ruined games" was actually "games I don't personally like." And no, that's not right, it's just your shitty opinion. "If i can't spend 500 hours on a game it's garbage". You sound like the worst kind of gamer. Lastly I just find it funny that your opposed to having fun on a game if it's too short for you. "Oh my god that game looks amazing. Graphics look awesome, storyline looks intense and gripping, customization and non-linear gameplay, oh wait, DAMN *only 200 hours of gameplay*. Ah, not worth it." [SEP] The Witcher 3, The Mass Effect Series, Dragon Age, The Last of Us... 60 bucks is a very fair price for the hours of fun and amazing stories from each of these games. Sorry they don't cut your elitist standard of 500 hours of playtime and extreme modifiability.
+1. Yes, if too many episodes pass where I don't get a chance to see something or forget to watch it I'll declare it "on hold". This happens a lot with shows airing on cable. ). I'm gonna be lost if I just watch next weeks. 2. because in the time I watched it it has given me no reason to drop, but it isn't competing with the other shows I'm watching that season. . . so I say I'll get back to it at a later date. 3. **Hajime no Ippo**. I should have finished it by now, because I'm only watching 3 currently running shows. .. .but i haven't even been watching those. That show is seriously good, and if Summer is as loaded as I expect it to be it's not gonna be easy to finish it then either. It's the same with **Michiko to Hatchin**. Spring was supposed to be my backlog season, and it just isn't happening. [SEP] For example I have missed too many episodes of Black Lagoon (for some reason FIOS thinks the episodes are reruns and doesn't tape them. . .it hasn't been on TV before, has it?
+Xbox version is also very bare for finding videos or info about it. Almost everything is PC based, which is similar but you can't really count on. Many players keep 5 or 6 tanks are money makers. You just made my point, new players can only hope to have 5 or 6 useful tanks at all. They run into guys like you who have stocked up tanks, crewed up, gold ammo, top gun, and are supposed to somehow outplay you? Game is fun once you get to higher levels, and most people are close to even in skill and tanks, and they know how to use them very efficiently. But that takes A LOT OF games to get there, and the grind is not welcoming to new players. Then jump from 8 to 10 isn't FAR different then a jump from 3 to 5, or 6 to 8. Almost every single person I play with that plays in top tiers is using Premium, premium rounds, and has crews leveled up. [SEP] Are you talking about Xbox player counts? On what server are you playing that there are a plethora of high tier tanks?
+>the peak frequency is close to 56Hz Almost certainly either 60 or 50 Hz, or some multiple thereof (60, 120, 240, etc...) on the nose, depending on your local grid. South America is pretty broken up, so you'll have to confirm yourself. >I am planning to build some bass traps with mineral wool in form of panels, place them in the corners of the room (as the standard procedure for studio rooms). However, other strategy is to build a double ceiling with similar materials (since de noise comes from above). A third strategy is to cover my window with a curtain made of that material (thinking that the noise may come from outside too). Unlikely to help. This will simply reduce nodes and stuff, and make the sound nice and clean. >(since de noise comes from above)....(thinking that the noise may come from outside too). Dollars to donuts says it's coupling through the walls. That's bad news for you, since you have cinderblock walls and can't change them. The real (but difficult) solution is to change the frequency of the AC unit (impossible) or change the frequency of your walls (less impossible). Decoupling the AC unit from the walls will help, but I don't think it's practical since the AC unit depends on a healthy seal on the window, and disrupting that with all rubber and bellows and stuff will be hard and make your neighbor angry. [SEP] The solution that jumps immediately to mind is to determine if your walls are hollow, and if they are to fill the voids with something like quickrete or expanding foam. That will change the resonant frequency of your walls and decouple them from the AC unit.
+It's a complicated question with no easy answers. Part of it depends on how much the nations of the world are willing to cooperate in order to enforce regulation of space travel and colonization. Part of it depends on the capability of world nations to enforce whatever laws and regulations they pass. For example, if we were to figure out a way to colonize the moon and make it self-sufficient we'd be in easy range of any colonies to enforce our will for better or worse. Maybe at some future time those colonies will be granted autonomy but at first most nations are going to want to keep control of any resources. The farther out we progress (again assuming we can manage it) the harder it will become to maintain control. When messages take hours and days to get to their destination and travel is measured in months and years it's not going to be possible to maintain a firm grip or respond to immediate concerns. Any ventures beyond our orbit will necessarily have a degree of autonomy knowing that any displeasure they provoke will offer them plenty of time to formulate a response. So I consider it highly likely that it would begin with a dog-eat-dog competition for prime locations and resources with petty concerns for life and property being treated as secondary to control. It all depends on what technologies we develop to overcome the obstacles presented by space travel and colonization. [SEP] Any colonies would need to step carefully in order to avoid any appearance of rebellion less they get quashed vigorously.
+I moved a lot when I was a kid and twice I was in the same situation. Both times about 3 months after I had moved, the mild taunting/bullying had escalated enough that another kid wanted to fight me for no reason. Both times I ended it quickly, and no one ever picked on me again. [SEP] the kid whined that I didn't fight fair
+Why do you say Islamic extremists instead of Muslims when you don’t say White Nationalist extremists? The shooting in Charleston, which wasn’t even really a terrorist attack, was condemned by every white nationalist and racist group I know of. How many Islamic groups out there support and celebrate violence perpetrated in the name of their faith? [SEP] White nationalism doesn’t have an invisible man in the sky who wrote a book telling them to kill the infidels, advocating lying to gain their trust.
+I'm not talking about Western feminists. I'm talking about Muslim women in the Middle East that are under the boot of men. Shouldn't feminism be focused on an issue like that, instead of a dude on tv saying a Girl is hot, or whatever the fuck they're upset with these days. , once that changed, the religion changed, and not the other way around. It's only now that the CC is finally falling in Ireland, but then again, divorce was still illegal when I was born, as was homosexuality, so we've come a decent way. [SEP] On the religion thing, it's funny. For example, here in Ireland women were treated like dirt for many years, largely people considered, because of the Catholic Church. But in the end it wasn't religion that was broken down, it was society's sexism
+There's a big difference between blunt and intentionally hurtful. INTJs can err towards blunt, for sure, but it doesn't give us free reign to be assholes about it. It's the difference between "look, this is pissing me off" and "you're a fucking bitch for doing this." So which is it? As an INTJ, I value honesty above pretty much everything. I don't sugar-coat, because I see sugar-coating insulting to both myself and the recipient; sugar-coating assumes that you're dealing with someone who is incapable of dealing with the realities of life and needs to be wrapped in cotton at all times, which is infantilizing and patronizing. It insinuates that you do not believe you're dealing with an adult who is capable of dealing with reality and that you and you alone are the only one capable of living in said reality, which is insanely egotistical. However, I cannot stand people who say 'oh I'm just blunt and honest' when really, they're being intentionally malicious and using 'bluntness' and 'honesty' as a cover for being hurtful and cruel. If your partner is being legitimately honest and straight forward, that means he sees you as an adult capable of dealing with reality as it is. One is blatant disrespect, one is a deep level of respect. Only you know which one it is. [SEP] If your partner is being hurtful and cruel, you need to find a new one.
+> *That's a false dichotomy. There are more options. How about God is neutral and determines what is just using his vast knowledge.* > *Of course this is a hypothetical discussion and doesn't reflect my own thoughts.* That's fine, it's an interesting discussion. [SEP] Then he wants it to be just, or he'd use his omnipotence to change whatever facts of the matter lead to it being just. Or does God not have that power?
+No minimum income. Put all lazy ones to work. >3,000 jobs up for grabs but only about 500 potential applicants showed up http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/tsawwassen-mills-job-fair-fails-to-attract-hoped-for-job-seekers-1.3727811 [SEP] There is no excuse not to work.
+and showing up today. I really thought he was going to shit the bed. [SEP] He's shutting us all up
+Oh one thing I forgot: So, I think having Sun as close to day 1 and then Randomized Moon later in Season 4 (maybe last run of Season 3) is the best way to go. [SEP] Randomized Moon is a planned run, and that will likely take into account the people that skip Sun for spoilers reasons (or other reasons they might be unavailable).
+The quote is from the "Daily Mirror", upon visiting their website lethargically I stumbled upon said article. I searched and searched for a quote till I reached the end by which time I realised the whole goal of the article was for me to consume their horse-shite. The quote read as follows: **A squad ­member said: ­“Everyone was surprised that the boss ­decided on Thursday that Robin was not allowed to come with us.”** "A squad member"............. [SEP] what have we done to deserve such shoddy workmanship from the "journalists" of today?
+Uhh... Edit : it used to be communities of fishermen before that but the Brits shaped Mumbai as we know it today by reclaiming land and connecting islands. [SEP] Didn't the Brits make Bombay by reclaiming land?
+And oh yeah I must be *sooo* angry because I made a passing comment that your post was retarded. Because people only say things like that when they're *really* angry, right? Are you sure it's not you that has been enraged by my remark and this is your attempt at deflecting your butthurt? [SEP] You said he shouldn't have disagreed with a feminist if he didn't want to get kicked out of the class. If you don't think that him getting kicked out was justified for that action then you wouldn't have said that.
+The whole gay/bi/str8 thing IS ridiculous. But the facts are that if I go have a few beers with my boys this weekend, and tell them about the amazing head my gay neighbor gave me..... it'll be an issue. Society is absurd in that way. I was incredibly turned on as it was happening. It felt so wrong.... but that's what was so hot about it. However, I still won't tell anyone about it just yet. Other than maybe a couple of my closest girlfriends. [SEP] As time goes by I'm caring less and less. Almost proud of it in a way.
+Training Experience Proven skills The ability to finish what they start Sure, there have been some great self-taught designers. David Carson was one. But he was one in a million, which means there are 999,999 chances you are not one. As it stands your portfolio will only get you absolute bottom rung design jobs, maybe working in a print shop. The work is far too basic and it doesn't demonstrate whatever creativity you may have. [SEP] College graduates have several things:
+Hey I didn't mean anything bad against them, I love shut up and sit down. [SEP] They do ooze middle class though.
+I think your approach works for the most part, but if I'm the interviewer I am looking for an actual weakness (ex: I am a weak in technical writing) and what they are doing to *improve* upon that weakness (I am taking a class/writing a technical blog/submitting articles to a peer reviewed journal). Turn the weakness into a strength by actually identifying and addressing the problem. [SEP] I don't want a BS answer about how you're such a hard worker.
+The idea behind them is better consistency between BB and bucking. Increasing accuracy not range. That being said, my guns are all flat hopped which is enormously easier, and are plenty accurate as far as BB go. [SEP] There is absolutely no reason why you would see increased ranged through r-hop or flat hop.
+I think there are some valid points. Not about the protein shakes, etc. But about the sense of community and the culture that spending too long at the gym can foster. It's probable that starting boys at the gym earlier will increase the chances of that - kids are far more easily influenced than adults. Encouraging a group to participate in an activity that can have lasting harm on your body at a very young age does have a lot of detriments to it. Personally, based off of the sheer abuse of equipment I see at my gym, I think it'd be best if newbies had to attend a "gym safety" seminar to teach them not to be complete idiots. And to fucking rerack their weights. [SEP] I've read recently that bigorexia (thinking you're small when you're muscular) is becoming a substantial issue for weightlifters in particular.
+Thats 2 hours, so the overheads of takeoff and landing get amortized over a longer flight duration... As you go shorter, the overheads form a larger percentage.. takeoff and landing are not at max speed, the cruise is much higher speed >I don't think, they are thinking in terms of poor people, more in terms of infra and job development Then the focus would have been roads and railway tracks. >that depends on value of your time. if you value 4 hour saved, more than 1000, you will go for it. most IT workers are paid 2k per day for 8 hour work. Someone who values their time at Rs 250/hour is not someone who needs to be subsidised by the tax paying public of this country. EDIT: and free time doesnt really have the same worth as work time. If a flight costs Rs 3k and an overnight volvo 1.5k, I'm taking the Volvo cause I can sleep 7 hours... [SEP] The one thing air travel is good at is that it needs relatively less infra
+A crime I did not commit... This is the shitty side of out justice system, I will be forever known as the person who was arrested for this crime. That being said the best analogy is that of quick sand, I felt like everything I did I just dug my hole deeper... You can't breathe, there's no respite, . I fled before I was arrested because I didn't know what else to do... edit spelling [SEP] you wake up feeling like someone is squeezing your heart
+This has me a little worried since there is so little info. Is this about Dockett since people seemed to like him and he was a vet? Are they crazy enough to cut Hayne? Yesterday I was so happy watching those guys ( :( [SEP] all the 2nd and 3rd stringers) play their heart out and now it has ended
+Yes, a more succinct version would be appreciated. [SEP] The threads linked within the FAQ contain answers.
+Says the fool who declares those with opposing opinions as trolls. Here is a taste of your own medicine. Just because you read a list of rhetoric fallacies, doesn't mean you know how to use them. Come up with a cogent argument that isn't centered around gross over generalization before you use big boy words. [SEP] Your posts are hate filled, flinging insults at anyone who disagrees with you.
+Other species do not rear their prey into lives of misery for the sole purpose of consumption. We are disrupting the natural order - like I've said in a previous comment, I do not find much issue in humans following the natural order and hunting. When a wolf kills an animal in nature, the animal lives a free life until it succumbs to its trophic superior. I am not trying to say that humans exist outside of nature either - I am simply using the word 'natural' contextually. [SEP] Domestication is different because we breed these conscious animals into lives of absolute misery and suffering that they understand.
+And the edible sort of pigeon rather than the common city vermin type . [SEP] (they're different breeds)
+>throw out insults that don't make sense. Not going to lie, I'm feeling pretty smug right now. [SEP] Because in no world should your champion and top guy lose, twice in a row, to a fucking jobber. It shouldn't even be a discussion.
+To be honest, Shinji was made, in part, as a reaction to the older mech franchise protagonists. Individuals who, when forced into a giant robot by fate, . It's a power fantasy, and Anno had issue with that. So he devised a character archetype that fit the exact opposite archetype. That archetype's been oversimplified as angst, but Shinji himself is a very well-characterized person, angst and all. [SEP] confidently step up and save the world (or something or other)
+I think "(all else being equal)" includes the block size (if that abstract coin uses blocks to store transactions). Just to prove that you are making a mistake by assuming that larger block size = higher centralization, consider a thought experiment: Bitcoin with 1Kb blocks every 10 minutes. I think not, because most of the people won't have a reason to run it. A few enthusiasts could run the full nodes, but that would probably not be sufficient to achieve the current level of decentralization. Do you understand now why I think that the argument that larger blocks always cause centralization needs to be proven (and is probably false)? [SEP] Do you think Bitcoin with 1Kb blocks (a full node can be run even on a smartphone!) would be more decentralized than Bitcoin with 1Mb blocks?
+I have to think that one: they will pry her secrets out of her pretty damn quick. At the very least her identity. And two: ? Why help her if there is nobody to punish you for failure to do so? [SEP] why would you stay a darkfriend if you literally have nobody to serve anymore
+I played the Beta. The tl;dr: If you have Rimworld- go play that instead. The game itself has some good things going for it, the atmosphere and the writing and concepts are well planned out but it's execution could use some work. I've found that the pacing of the game and how you progress seems to need work. You designate an area for trees to be felled and something like a basic dormitory to be setup. That process alone will take the colonists several days to do. The UI is a bit difficult to grasp as well, nothing on the level of Dward Fortress but the amount of menus and lines and logs you have to go through to figure out where the break in a production line happens is maddening, the extra detail that they put into the texture and terrain works against the art style in making it difficult to differentiate between an item of interest on the ground and non-interactable texture. There's also the sheer amount of busywork that's required. You build a stone oven and you assign a person to cook soup. A person grabs one unit of vegetable over to a stove and then stands over it for several hours and produces 1 soup. That 1 soup is enough to feed one colonist for a few hours, so you have a good portion of your workforce cooking food at all times. Then a stove breaks and you have to manually click to have it repaired, which could cause a chain break that results in a good portion of your colony starving. I only have about 20-30 hours into the game and this is from months ago- but everytime I pick it up I think to myself "Why am I not playing Rimworld instead?" Every mechanic and feature of the game is done better in Rimworld, [SEP] there's even a Lovecraft mod for Rimworld now too.
+Subway's a franchise, so it's up to the owners. Most will let their workers, but some are greedy and [SEP] don't treat their employees well.
+> All you have done is spout one-liner 'refutations', without actually addressing any points I have made, as well as shifted the goalposts several times. You should go back to the beginning of this dialogue where I stated that I have nothing to gain by proving yet another faceless person on the internet wrong and I have no desire to do so. It has gained me nothing in the past and it will gain me nothing by doing so now. Obama has not reversed Bush's policies; he has renewed them. Tax cuts for the rich, war in the middle east, renewing and expanding the patriot act, war on marijuana dispensaries, failing to hold Wall Street accountable, continuing Gitmo incarcerations, and on and on. You need to make excuses for all of these things. I think personally I am most interested in knowing why Obama took a single payer option off the table from the beginning of health care discussions. Same fucking thing on both sides of the aisle. [SEP] You keep making excuses about why the parties are identical; "Romney's a flip flopper" "GOP wants Obama to fail."
+The creepiest thing is that there was no music. [SEP] Some say he's still dancing to this very day.
+It depends on the person I'm hugging. I have to stand on something to hug one of my best friends (he's 6'8), so our perfect hugs are ones where I'm near something I can use as a ladder. Another one of my friends always kisses my cheek when she hugs me and that's nice. and bear-huggers. I dunno, they're all perfect in their own ways. Apparently I am a huge hippie about hugs. [SEP] Then there are back-scratchers
+It's because I feel it creates a bad atmosphere when you forfeit your previous decision. In your manager's eye, you become the person who threatens to get a salary increase. Other may have a pure economical approach, but that's just me. [SEP] If I decide that I would quit my job, no amount of salary increase can change my mind.
+It's not unlikely you'd need to get newer versions from a package manager or even compile them yourself, for some projects. > Plus, you know, there's the whole utility of not having written this in JavaScript and instead having it written in a language people want/like to read/use/extend. While you may dislike Javascript, and so do I to some degree, but: a) It does not have a small community by any measure. I don't think, if this tool gathered some following, that nobody would contribute to it just because it is JS. b) We haven't actually looked at the code. It might look great, it might look terrible, but using Javascript does not guarantee either of them. You can write horrible Python or Ruby that nobody wants to work with. > ("fucking node.js" is meant to display ire toward node.js and it's trendy bullshit, not toward the original comment) :) People that tell you to replace all your servers with node.js are spewing trendy bullshit. People that say things like 'web-scale' as an argument for node are too. That does not mean *every usage* of node is bullshit. It is a language runtime like any other, and immediately hating any project using it makes no sense. [SEP] OS X comes with usually not up-to-date versions of Python and Ruby.
+I'm sorry but I disliked Walter Jr. from the start. He never did anything that deserved my dislike, . Not to mention he suffered from cerebral palsy, and he was depicted as receiving hate from other kids about it. I just didn't like him.... fuck I am an asshole. [SEP] as a matter of fact he probably suffered the most out of any character in the show in terms of Walt's unintended consequences
+Do you want to live in a society where your neighbor can incinerate the entire neighborhood (or city for that matter)? Face it, my little guns are cap guns when it comes down to it, so cast your vote carefully. ;) [SEP] If you want the government to be less likely to break your door down, vote Democrat
+I don't think thats the case with the VA. They have a huge budget. THe problem is when ….thats the problem. Put Congress and the senate on the VA system and you'll see how fast that gets straightened out [SEP] there are 8 psychologists that only see 3 patients a week, due to union constraints
+Real story: We were in port a few days ago, and a cat came aboard via mooring line. We lost track of her, and found her later that evening. We managed to get her back to the pier, and waved goodbye as we took off. This cat seemed unusually upset by this... Turns out, in the short time she was on board, she gave birth to THREE kittens. We found the other two after I submitted this post. The poor things went almost four days with no food or mommy before we found them in the machine shop. We have been bottle feeding them all day, and have already contacted local veterinary services to come check them out. After the initial shock of being found, and feeding, the kittens are just as happy and playful as any other cute little bugger you'd find anywhere else. They were a great boost to crew moral, and I LOVE THEM. I'm a sucker. tl;dr Yes, it was really a stowaway. . [SEP] And now I love him
+>oh ok. so the guy would have still shot 70 people, plus the 1 that the hero shot. got it. The risk is that multiple people are carrying concealed weapons, they cannot tell who is helping and who is an accomplice, and the entire situation escalates. [SEP] The guy was mentally ill. He rigged his apartment to explode, and he compared himself to the Joker. Increased risk of dying would not have prevented him from trying to kill people.
+**** Men affect something of woman in their first endeavors of love. But a man's love, the love a woman yearns for, is not like that of a woman's. A man's love is virile, domineering and aloof. Stop loving like a woman and you will cease to be treated as such. [SEP] Kindness is only appreciated if it is unexpected.
+Jar jar. [SEP] Fucking jar jar.
+It's almost like it isn't the party in control that determines an area's relative prosperity. No way it could be that whole war thing they lost, their economy being absolutely reduced to nothing, their currency being outlawed, and their leaders being barred from holding office again. That can't have anything to do with it. [SEP] I mean, why would the South be poorer? Obviously it's because they vote Republican.
+> What has been written? Don't just say there is material or there without telling me what it is. , and this really doesn't have to do with complementarianism. >when this had been repeatedly demonstrated to be impossible. I have friends who struggle with this every day, and they willingly die to those desires for the sake of Christ. It's not different than other fleshly desires. We all have them, and to follow Christ means dying to them. If you have any other questions relating to complementarianism, I'll be glad to answer them. Otherwise, I'll move on. [SEP] I'm not really here to debate
+It's on the Aussie one as well, . [SEP] it's also a crime to joke about it
+I tend to agree with him. Remember when Vick and McNabb were the shit and everyone was saying that the scrambling QB was the "future"? And then..well...2 years later they got hit a few too many times and couldn't really do that as well anymore? We'll probably see a spike in read option next year, and maybe the year after that, but all it takes is a rough hit and you can't really run anymore. [SEP] The pocket-presence, "game management" QB is always going to be in demand. They never go out of style.
+I've been on reddit long enough to figure out, if there's a will, there's a subreddit. When I misread something like that, the imagery flashing through my mind. It could be anywhere from a shittyfoodporn-esque subreddit, pictures of the "aftermath" of overly spicy foods and all the way across the spectrum to a "..or hell... this is the internet. *cooking* naked asian females. But yes. I love /r/FoodPorn .. Mmmm [SEP] cooking w/ naked asian females
+He gets to explore more (especially if he actually does his hunt logs), get all those aetherytes in all the cities and zones. I'd probably say let him hit 20 first and get his chocobo, help out the travel. Also, ARC could cross class anything, having all jobs up would give him a lot of options; equipping Protect, casting it, then swapping it for Cure or Bloodbath for soloing was nice. At the very least, get up LNC and PUG for unlocking BRD and having the crossclasses ready. [SEP] Except all jobs at 15 means you're set to unlock advanced jobs no matter what, and level 1-15 doesn't take that long.
+> LGBT-groups have similarly spoken about "Christian" same-sex marriages, doesn't make it a norm. Because it wasn't a norm in Christianity nor was it accepted. It may have not been the norm in India, doesn't mean that it wasn't accepted. >Haha, nooo. No agragarian society is matriarchal in nature, and even matrilineal and matrifocal societies are male-centric. You are like an SJW, but you try to justify it by lying about historical India and other cultures. >Like I said all my ebooks/bookmarks are on my laptop which I don't have with me rn, I promise I'll PM/reply to you w/ it tomorrow. Don't worry! Good luck! [SEP] You sure haven't been to North East India have you? I wasn't even making a reference to Vedic culture regarding this. India was patriarchal, no doubt. But we were not as harsh as other groups were!
+Hospitals charge a ton because insurance will pay for it. When hospitals charge you $45,000 for a routine procedure, they know the insurance company will bargain with them to about $10,000 and call it even. It's a made up number meant to open up negotiation. However, the whole procedure actually cost $600. Somewhere down the line, someone made a 1566% profit off of you getting hurt, and it wasn't the doctors and it . [SEP] wasn't the insurance companies
+>Uhm, no, this is the only robust way. >It should never be out of sync, any change you make must be reflected in the REPL state immediately. It gets out of sync very easily. Say, I define a function and send it to the REPL. Then I delete or rename it, unless I remember to explicitly remove it from the REPL state it'll stay there. Or maybe I move the function to a different place in the source and now it needs a forward declaration, there's no way for the REPL to tell. >It might be a bad idea to separate these things. I disagree. >And more crippled, limiting the abstractions you can work with. If that's what you believe then Clojure is not a language for you. It's really that simple. [SEP] It's robust because it allows your editor to think that code in the file is different from what it actually is?
+The source is great but which steals the farm from the allied carry. A good KotL will stack and farm the jungle to get a fast mek/force staff and work towards his aghanims. KotL himself does need a few items though I feel. The graph is a normalized winrate compared to cs/min - its clever stuff. Its saying how much should your hero be farming compared to the other heroes. With heroes like Omni, ogre and earthshaker they should be getting their money by assist/kill gold not by farming, and those that choose to farm instead are letting their team down and forcing them to fight 4v5 without the amazing skills that you offer. I would say all of those are more item dependent than the classic 5's: crystal maiden / shadow demon / jakiro / rubick. [SEP] KotL in particular is heavily skewed by the tendency of worse players to just blast down the creep wave
+> They are procedural (no, they're not) How are they not? > He has no idea how to unit test procedural code Of course you can test procedural code, but it can be much harder when you can't, for example, easily mock out internal state. > If your application consists entirely of static methods it will be hard to unit test (Sure maybe, but that is kind of a ridiculous argument against static methods) Why is that ridiculous? Testability is a very important metric of code. > Most static methods would be better off as instance methods of one of their arguments (A matter of taste, definitely not a reason that "static methods are bad". ) It may be a matter of taste that a *particular* static method would be better off non-static. But it's not a matter of taste that the majority of static methods would be better as non-static methods. This is a hypothesis that may or may not be true, but is testable as long as you believe in the methodologies of modern software engineering research. > Also note that people are managing to unit test things just fine in languages like Haskell where a lot of the codebase is going to be made up of 'static methods'. Non-OO procedural code is hard to test because its state is not as easily encapsulated as OO and functional (which of course has no state). [SEP] They're not really static methods for this purpose though, because testing is all about getting software in a particular state (and then verifying this state is as expected). Functional programming is so testable because it (ideally) has no state! If a function f is totally defined by its arguments a, b and c, then we can simply test f with every permutation of a, b, and c, perhaps pruning this space if it is too large.
+That way you really need to want someone imprisoned forever for it to be cost effective. Maybe make it so that only alts can be in the same chest also, if that is possible? [SEP] Possibly make it so that you can only put one prison pearl per container (chest, furnace, etc)?
+I'm really digging Dr. Adam Back's 2 mb now, 4 mb in 2 years, 8 mb in 4 years, and then re-evaluate proposal. It's a cautious and measured approach to scaling up the block size, and makes sure we don't risk decentralization. , and who knows, by then we may have working implementations of other more efficient scaling mechanisms, such as Lightning Network. [SEP] 4 years is an eternity in Bitcoin
+You are forcing your beliefs upon them and you went to them for help (job). The irony of this is gold. [SEP] Don't work for them. Start your own business.
+"Already being tried for a crime"? "Terms of her release"? No, if she commits new Contempt she can be rejailed. "The judge wouldn't have said it if it weren't true" A disarmingly cute inanity, thanks. "You're a mindless child...." Physician, heal thyself.... [SEP] What crime is that?
+Oh ok, the logic flow makes more sense now. However, The problem is that Asian comedians can't really succeed as of now without having most of their repertoire being Asian jokes, because the play on Asian stereotypes are almost expected of them. There really isn't a choice. My ideal would be that both the 80%s and the 0%s are able to find success. > And I pointed out that the comics that Asians most enjoy seeing are actually people that do a lot of Asian jokes. How did you conclude this???? Why do you say Asians prefer cheap Asian jokes more than just a clever comedy? Asians (probably we are talking about western Asian immigrants only) liking Russell Peter might be because of the shared immigrant experience. Or maybe it is because all other Asian comedian who refrain from Asian jokes are shut down in their infancy, so the most popular comedian is the one who make the joke in the most relatively respectful way and they can identify the closest to compared to all existing comedians. [SEP] I did not argue that "I want Asian comics to do, ideally, 0% Asian jokes".
+This ain't like cable companies where breaking into the market you need millions upon millions of dollars, you just gotta be a decent web dev with some spare cash.. [SEP] And they're kidding themselves if they think that no one can make their own website similar to reddit.
+Not me personally, but I have seen someone leave a job in under 1 hour. Shitty night shift, stocking shelves for a terrible company ^cough Kmart ^cough. The guy decided within the first 30 minutes that he didn't like the job and told the manager he would be leaving. 20 minutes go by and no one can seem to find the dude and then all of a sudden the alarm system for the store starts going off. He hated the job so much, he forcefully broke open the door and just walked out into the night. [SEP] Manager tells him that the store is locked down until at least 5AM.
+Well, it's seems you have a lot more experience than me. My girl is seeking intimacy more than sex, and marriage is a thing that will only happen to get things right with the kids. She does have a loving father, and my parents are cool too, so this fits your theory. I don't know, I'm still not convinced that being bad is such a good thing to have a relationship. Maybe it works better for one night stands or starting relationships, I have very little experience there. [SEP] Even if all you say is true, I'd still prefer to look for a girl that appreciates me being good instead of trying to keep her with bad attitude.
+Haha I love this. The first country to win it twice (after 2008). Beat Japan after penalties, after barely holding on to a draw. [SEP] I'd like to imagine government officials don't know how to handle actually winning something after faking winning every imaginable prize.
+http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2458136,00.asp Just because Titanfall is the best selling game of the month doesn't mean the global amount of software sales for the xbox one is higher. [SEP] Here you go, I'll do the work for you so you can realize how bad your reading comprehension is.
+But isn't the majority of their electricity produced from coal-fired plants? [SEP] Out of the frying pan . . .