[QUOTE=Clovis;52324425]it honestly depends on how your brain works. you guys are using that as your defense, then using it to say that gk99 is wrong when it works both ways[/QUOTE]
It's objectively wrong to imply that people use it to refer to their partner as an infant. That was gk99's point. As for your point, I agree that if you find the connotation weird then more power to you, but drawing an asinine line and splitting hairs by saying "baby" is weird simply because of the other meanings in the word of silly.
Fidget spinners don't really bother me.
[QUOTE=_Axel;52324583]Fidget spinners don't really bother me.[/QUOTE]
i used my brothers and they're actually good at being what they are; literally something to do with your hands
[QUOTE=WhiteGirl88;52324186]I'm not literally calling the guy an infant. Words can have two meanings sometime. Is it weird to call your girlfriend cupcake? I mean, she isn't food right? While you might be uncomfortable with the term 'daddy' because of the connotations, saying that the use of the word baby in an affectionate context towards your SO is very pedantic.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but cupcake is actually a sweet (and delicious :smug:) thing, which kind of makes sense. But, and I'm not speaking for everyone, but my infants and my dad aren't exactly things that I fancy
[QUOTE=gokiyono;52324790]Yeah but cupcake is actually a sweet (and delicious :smug:) thing, which kind of makes sense. But, and I'm not speaking for everyone, but my infants and my dad aren't exactly things that I fancy[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex"]dont forget this[/URL] which makes it helluva lot worse
I still think Yonkers by Tyler, The Creator is a good song even if he himself hates it
[QUOTE=Clovis;52319805]Yeah but why did you type all this? If I didn't care about that post, what makes you think I'd read this[/QUOTE]
People mentioned about wall of text in my post. So I was responding to them. Not every one else. Second the post was meant for Nikolai. He asked a question, I wanted talk about what I learned bout corruption in reaponse.
The fact you made a reply to my post means you want me to reply.
In america its because people are too unstable mentally and emotionally. They act a like abused children or battered spouses when it comes to voter\politician relation ship. US culture generates broken toys and awards abusive people on both sides of aisle with status wealth power and privelage. See Hillary and trump as great examples. While it punishes those who wanna reverse that. See Bernie Sanders. The problem the US public covers for it's assholes who hurt them and hurt those who give a damn. It is not right.
In mexico the reason for corruption is different. Its due to climate, location and religion. America Protestantism is the prosperity gospel. Work hard now get the pay off later. May it be in form of heaven or wealth or both.
Catholic religion boils down to "if god wills it". It sends the message to Mexican citizens it doesn't matter what one does, what happens happens.
Hence the religion creates further entrenchment of present time orientation even further in a culture that has such a time perspective as a core feature of every day life.
[QUOTE=Guriosity;52325935]People mentioned about wall of text in my post. So I was responding to him. Not every one else. Second the post was meant for Nikolai. He asked a question, I wanted talk about what I learned bout corruption.
The fact you made a reply to my post means you want me to reply.[/QUOTE]
Not everyone's looking for a reply when they quote you. Also you, again, replied with a wall of text showing you're obviously not paying attention to what people are saying. Clovis was complaining about the fact you keep writing walls of text and asked why you'd expect them to read it. Only for you to reply with another wall of text...
[QUOTE=Alice3173;52325946]Not everyone's looking for a reply when they quote you. Also you, again, replied with a wall of text showing you're obviously not paying attention to what people are saying. Clovis was complaining about the fact you keep writing walls of text and asked why you'd expect them to read it. Only for you to reply with another wall of text...[/QUOTE]
Which I'm working on. I was responding to Nikolai. I was explaining the best I could why corruption happens here in USA. I'm trying keep it short and brief.
[QUOTE=WhiteGirl88;52324186]I'm not literally calling the guy an infant. Words can have two meanings sometime. Is it weird to call your girlfriend cupcake? I mean, she isn't food right? While you might be uncomfortable with the term 'daddy' because of the connotations, saying that the use of the word baby in an affectionate context towards your SO is very pedantic.[/QUOTE]
I don't like the idea of sticking my dick in something I refer to as "baby." I wouldn't have a problem sticking my dick in a cupcake. This shouldn't be a hard concept to grasp.
[editline]7th June 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Alice3173;52325946]Not everyone's looking for a reply when they quote you. Also you, again, replied with a wall of text showing you're obviously not paying attention to what people are saying. Clovis was complaining about the fact you keep writing walls of text and asked why you'd expect them to read it. Only for you to reply with another wall of text...[/QUOTE]
That's like one paragraph. I type as much as that on a very regular basis, the difference is that I don't space it out as much across lines that make it look bigger than it is. I really wouldn't call that a "wall of text," just poor formatting.
[QUOTE=Guriosity;52325950]Which I'm working on. I was responding to Nikolai. I was explaining the best I could why corruption happens here in USA. I'm trying keep it short and brief.[/QUOTE]
You really need to work on your formatting then. Posting two paragraphs in response to someone followed by several more unrelated paragraphs in response to someone else you didn't quote is jarring to read at the very least. You should have either quoted Nikolai or posted that part above Clovis' quote for readability:
[QUOTE=Guriosity;52325935]In america its because people are too unstable mentally and emotionally. They act a like abused children or battered spouses when it comes to voter\politician relation ship. US culture generates broken toys and awards abusive people on both sides of aisle with status wealth power and privelage. See Hillary and trump as great examples. While it punishes those who wanna reverse that. See Bernie Sanders. The problem the US public covers for it's assholes who hurt them and hurt those who give a damn. It is not right.
In mexico the reason for corruption is different. Its due to climate, location and religion. America Protestantism is the prosperity gospel. Work hard now get the pay off later. May it be in form of heaven or wealth or both.
Catholic religion boils down to "if god wills it". It sends the message to Mexican citizens it doesn't matter what one does, what happens happens.
Hence the religion creates further entrenchment of present time orientation even further in a culture that has such a time perspective as a core feature of every day life.
[QUOTE=Clovis]Yeah but why did you type all this? If I didn't care about that post, what makes you think I'd read this[/QUOTE]
People mentioned about wall of text in my post. So I was responding to them. Not every one else. Second the post was meant for Nikolai. He asked a question, I wanted talk about what I learned bout corruption in reaponse.
The fact you made a reply to my post means you want me to reply.[/QUOTE]
This is much more readable and makes it a lot more clear what you're intending to say. You don't just randomly jump off into a seemingly unrelated tangent after addressing Clovis' point.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;52325975]You really need to work on your formatting then. Posting two paragraphs in response to someone followed by several more unrelated paragraphs in response to someone else you didn't quote is jarring to read at the very least. You should have either quoted Nikolai or posted that part above Clovis' quote for readability:
This is much more readable and makes it a lot more clear what you're intending to say. You don't just randomly jump off into a seemingly unrelated tangent after addressing Clovis' point.[/QUOTE]
I made up the idea abusive personalities vs anti abuse as a way to distance my self from the alt right. That or de convert libertarians away from the alt right.
Sometimes it works and some time it does not.
Who said you had to?
[QUOTE=Clovis;52326120]You literally replied to my posts twice? Like youre addressing me, then writing a wall of text. If you now turn around and say 'Who said you had to?' then who did you intend to read your posts if you were replying to me
[editline]8th June 2017[/editline]
I was trying to tell you people generally dont read large uninteresting posts, and then you reply with more paragraphs about mexico nobody asked for. You had your first post to make your points and you never got to one.[/QUOTE]
The unpopular thread before this one Nikolai made a post about mexico. I quoted him. He seemed concerned about how to deal with corruption. So, I made a post what I think the cause of corruption in both USA and mexico.
I was talking to him.
In America corruption exists because the voting public is emotionally unstable. In mexico? Its due to climate, Catholicism and location.
[QUOTE=Rudevinny;52327147]Dinosaurs are some real uninteresting shit to me[/QUOTE]
I think the "dinosaur era" is more interesting than the actual dinosaurs. I just think it's cool as fuck to imagine a time when earth didn't have a hint of civilization, everything was vastly different from the modern world, and gigantic animals roamed all over.
I don't care if your fave is a stegosaurus or whatever but I will admit it is pretty amazing to actually go to a museum and look at the size of the things irl and imagine them wandering around.
[QUOTE=Bathtub;52325509]I still think Yonkers by Tyler, The Creator is a good song even if he himself hates it[/QUOTE]
The Lyrics are a bit too Goblin-era Tyler for my tastes but the song is still good due to the instrumental and his flow on that song is one of his best showings
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52328836]I'm honestly wondering if we need an amendment here in the united states that allows people, without consent from congress to oust the president if they fit ALL or some number the following criteria;
Their popularity hits a critical low percentage say below 40%, mind you the average approval rate of presidents hovers around 53% to 62% 1st and 2nd term respectively. so this would rarely be invoked. [url]http://www.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx[/url]
They go on the record having spread several falsehoods
and have damaged the reputation of the united states among its allies and internationally
Deliberately acted in a way that benefits a hostile power
Used the executive powers in a manner that is determined to be unconstitutional.
Essentially, a case could be made by popular petition or by a member of congress could be brought to the SCOTUS. if the SCOTUS determines the case is worth trying and the criteria is judged to have been met both the president and the vice president are immediately terminated from office, the former being prohibited from holding public office for life. The presidency is then handed to the speaker of the house.
Yeah I realize this probably wouldn't fly in the current state of affairs and would probably need something absolutely catastrophic to happen or be uncovered for it to gain any traction. This post is mostly for the sake of brainstorming tbh.[/QUOTE]
The leadership isn't the issue in america. Its the public. On both ends.
The leaders we get in America are a reflection of our collective sub conscious. What both sides offered up in the potus election is a sign we as a nation are fucked in the head.
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52331639]The general public didn't select Trump though?[/QUOTE]
Not what I am saying. Just like a person suffering from depression shouldn't go gun shopping while depressed, a voting public that's a bit kook koo shouldn't be voting till it recovers.
snip
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52328836]I'm honestly wondering if we need an amendment here in the united states that allows people, without consent from congress to oust the president if they fit ALL or some number the following criteria;[/QUOTE]
That's not how America was every supposed to work.
[QUOTE=WhiteGirl88;52335211]That's not how America was every supposed to work.[/QUOTE]
It's not, but take into consideration that the reason we have the 2nd amendment is because they thought we needed a "well-regulated militia" and it hasn't changed in two centuries, despite us having one of the most powerful armies in the entire world.
[editline]a[/editline]
I don't mean "we should remove it," but we clearly no longer need a [I]militia[/I] to protect our country that spans horizontally across the whole continent.
killing floor is overrated even for its time
[editline]10th June 2017[/editline]
its not a bad game
its just not as hype as its made out to be
I sort of like Watch_Dogs, if only for the (surprisingly still active) multiplayer.
[QUOTE=gk99;52336212]It's not, but take into consideration that the reason we have the 2nd amendment is because they thought we needed a "well-regulated militia" and it hasn't changed in two centuries, despite us having one of the most powerful armies in the entire world.
[editline]a[/editline]
I don't mean "we should remove it," but we clearly no longer need a [I]militia[/I] to protect our country that spans horizontally across the whole continent.[/QUOTE]
I would rather have the local militias and not really need them, as opposed to not having them and we need to reorganize them later. The fact that the US is so militarized in the civilian sense is a huge deterrent to foreign invasion. We could almost cut foreign military action completely and still be relatively safe from attack because all of our citizens 17-45 count as the militia. We will always need a militia, organized or not purely as a deterrent and our activities overseas do not nullify this need. In addition, the second amendment was to help against threats foreign [U]and domestic[/U]. So the fact that we are so powerful militarily is just more reason to have a stronger militia.
Also fyi, "well-regulated" does not mean monitored or managed like it does today. Back when it was written, well-regulated just meant that it was in proper working order. So they wanted us to have a good militia, not a militia that was managed or subject to regulation.
([URL]http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm[/URL])
[QUOTE=Redcoat893;52336490]I sort of like Watch_Dogs, if only for the (surprisingly still active) multiplayer.[/QUOTE]
I wish ubisoft was given the time to make games polished and were actually allowed to update them
[editline]10th June 2017[/editline]
Watch_Dogs should have been a better game
[QUOTE=Zombinie;52336736]I would rather have the local militias and not really need them, as opposed to not having them and we need to reorganize them later. The fact that the US is so militarized in the civilian sense is a huge deterrent to foreign invasion. We could almost cut foreign military action completely and still be relatively safe from attack because all of our citizens 17-45 count as the militia. We will always need a militia, organized or not purely as a deterrent and our activities overseas do not nullify this need. In addition, the second amendment was to help against threats foreign [U]and domestic[/U]. So the fact that we are so powerful militarily is just more reason to have a stronger militia.
Also fyi, "well-regulated" does not mean monitored or managed like it does today. Back when it was written, well-regulated just meant that it was in proper working order. So they wanted us to have a good militia, not a militia that was managed or subject to regulation.
([URL]http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm[/URL])[/QUOTE]
Tbh all the other civilized countries seem to be fine without a militia so I'm still not seeing the need.
[editline]10th June 2017[/editline]
I liked Watch_Dogs for the gameplay. The combat was solid, the stealth was passable, the driving was arcadey, being able to hack shit was super nice, etc.
The one single thing that I despise with every fiber in my being is the ridiculous cop catchup AI and forced chase scenes. One part in particular I had to try 6 times before I finally managed to finish the mandatory story mission that this was, only by getting on a train and waiting 10 minutes
Can't stand chicken with bones. Strips or nothing.
Alienware really isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.
Obviously, the best course of action is to build your own PC, though if you're traveling, I think the Alpha qualifies as "the next best thing"
[QUOTE=xZippy;52338482]Can't stand chicken with bones. Strips or nothing.[/QUOTE]
i went to a bar that served boneless wings once
the sauce was runny bullshit that had no zest
after a while i realized i spent 15 dollars on a bunch of chicken nuggets and watered down ketchup
bones or bust yo
[QUOTE=Mining Bill;52338519]i went to a bar that served boneless wings once
the sauce was runny bullshit that had no zest
after a while i realized i spent 15 dollars on a bunch of chicken nuggets and watered down ketchup
bones or bust yo[/QUOTE]
When I was interning in Amsterdam, every Wednesday I had to get something to eat between it and my D&D sessions.
Fucking 2 euro chicken strip snackbox, mang.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
Unpopular opinions V8 Flat IS NOTHING
