Tudd fudders - General - Facepunch Forum

[QUOTE=Tudd;51757880]I would like to chime in on something. I think it is important to realise that I am not right on every argument, but I am putting my opinon out here knowing full well that the demographics are going against me on popular opinion. I have my strong arguments and my weak ones, just like everyone else. And I do talk to people who treat me with respect the respect I owe them. That one thread about the ban is a good example of how not to have a political discourse. Nagging, labeling me a fascist-nazi-xenophobe-racist-unamerican individual, switching the topics with "Tudd answer this." is why I don't feel inclined to engage with anyone in that thread specifically. But I can handle that, and actually doesn't piss me off. If I didn't want it to I would just leave. What does make me frustrated, is watching the same people shit on moderates/centrists who have a more neutral position or "appears" to support Trump in the same ways. I have seen multiple people in the middle of bandwagon say, "Fuck this, I hope Trump wins" because they got so sick of the hyperbolic whining or ridiculous reactions to news. I get several PMs and wall messages of people who tell me, "I really don't agree with you, but keep doing it and those guys are ridiculous" so I know this is coming from somewhere that would otherwise rather not deal with me. So my message is, don't think everyone is watching you with envied eyes when you call me a Fascist, or destroy someone with centrist view cause they can't hold a "balanced view" according to you. [b]The people who do this are counter-actively making people disagree/move away from these views you hold.[/b][/QUOTE] The thing is... If this were a Bush vs Gore or Mccain vs Obama situation we can fully understand why you would hold your opinion on supporting them; they are understanable candidates. But Trump is clearly only negative to anyone who has half a brain. You put on the image that you have at least a half of a brain which is so saddening to see. If you can't see how that gangster is going to rob your country blind then I really do pity you.

[QUOTE=Toothpick;51758068]The thing is... If this were a Bush vs Gore or Mccain vs Obama situation we can fully understand why you would hold your opinion on supporting them; they are understanable candidates. But Trump is clearly only negative to anyone who has half a brain. You put on the image that you have at least a half of a brain which is so saddening to see. If you can't see how that gangster is going to rob your country blind then I really do pity you.[/QUOTE] Well that's the problem, I simply don't see it like that. And that's why we have this fundamental disconnect. I think the true answer is always something closer in the middle of two biased sources, and that is perhaps why I am so interested in posting news and sources that fundamentally oppose the popular opinion here.

yeah and you simply wont respond to basic questions in order to maintain that fundamental disconnect. only god knows why

[QUOTE=Tudd;51758078]Well that's the problem, I simply don't see it like that. And that's why we have this fundamental disconnect. I think the true answer is always something closer in the middle of two biased sources, and that is perhaps why I am so interested in posting news and sources that fundamentally oppose the popular opinion here.[/QUOTE] How [b]do[/b] you see it?

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;51758084]yeah and you simply wont respond to basic questions in order to maintain that fundamental disconnect. only god knows why[/QUOTE] Hey [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1550869&p=51756911&viewfull=1#post51756911]look[/url], a thread where I have a disagreement with (with the classic "Trump Supporters, how do you defend this!"), state my opinon on what's wrong, don't antagonize the person who posted it, and we came out with a more positive discourse. [editline]31st January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Toothpick;51758088]How [b]do[/b] you see it?[/QUOTE] Would be better to get specific since this small question is unpacking a huge package.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51758103]Would be better to get specific since this small question is unpacking a huge package. One that I have tackled in many ways in previous threads on different topics.[/QUOTE] I mean just saying that my question is vague even though it really isn't seeing as you already addressed how you "don't see it that way" (indicating you already have a way that you currently "see" it, which should be explainable); is just more deflecting.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51758103]Hey [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1550869&p=51756911&viewfull=1#post51756911]look[/url], a thread where I have a disagreement with (with the classic "Trump Supporters, how do you defend this!"), state my opinon on what's wrong, don't antagonize the person who posted it, and we came out with a more positive discourse.[/QUOTE] [img]https://blog.jixee.me/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cherry-pick.png[/img] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Reaction image" - Novangel))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Tudd;51758078]Well that's the problem, I simply don't see it like that. And that's why we have this fundamental disconnect. I think the true answer is always something closer in the middle of two biased sources, and that is perhaps why I am so interested in posting news and sources that fundamentally oppose the popular opinion here.[/QUOTE] If you believe that the answer is in less bias and more moderation, why do you still continue to follow and post things from people like [url="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMOaRU-YsXVgU-WahBkZqWQ/videos"]this guy[/url] who have absolutely no interest in calming tensions and only serve their own interests of generating rage through yellow journalism and clickbait? The answer to bias is [I]not more bias[/I].

[QUOTE=ChronoBlade;51754153]I'm just saying I believe most of this people on this forum hate Tudd just because of who he voted for, and that's literally about all that people bring up every time he posts. Which I think is shallow. Though, he doesn't actually seem malicious. He actually seems quite reasonable compared to the people who attack him.[/QUOTE] lol this is getting dumbed but I 100% agree and I'm unsure why the majority would find this a dumb opinion. Tudd is [I]absolutely[/I] hated for his political views. As someone who browses SH every day and tries to delve into nearly every thread I can, among the [I]dozens[/I] of Trump threads (nearly never started by Tudd himself), you see the same pattern emerge. Inherently and fundamentally outrageous news article is posted, a few 50 star + mindless posts all saying the same thing (woOW trump is a nazi!!) before someone says "WELL, TUDD???" at the end of one of their posts and suddenly the entire thread is expecting Tudd replies. When Tudd does reply, he gets dogpiled by dozens of people all saying different arguments, and if Tudd dares to not reply to even one of those arguments, he's spammed with nothing else but "Answer the question, Tudd." Tudd, like any reasonable human being of any political affiliation, taps out of these threads because fuck that toxicity, right? Then everyone just wanks in a circle to themselves while they repeat how Tudd refuses to answer any arguments and he's clearly a retard. Tudd's fucking right, guys. He manages to appear as the arbiter of civil discussion and discourse to the centralists and middle-grounders of the discussion. I am [I]not[/I] a trump supporter in any way and I cannot personally fathom that many positives to it, but I find myself more engaged in trying to defuse rampart Tudd hate in SH more than I am discussing the topics. [editline]1st February 2017[/editline] Like seriously half of you guys have this problem with "I just can't understand why someone as smart as him would back someone as dumb as trump!" and I think your [I]actual[/I] problem with that is it destroys your narrative of every trump supporter being a drooling retard/redneck/KKK member.

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51757739]I remember in election day a LOT of people wanting Hillary to win, so I don't know what's "liked" in your book but for me a lot of people here supported her during the elections. Just go to a past election thread and see how much people wanted Hillary to win. [/QUOTE] You missed his point. Of course people wanted Clinton to win on FP, I think that is an understatement. His point is that all but one or two people who "supported" Clinton acknowledged that she had numerous flaws. No one who supports Trump is willing to admit that he has done anything questionable, outright saying that every thing Trump has done between starting his campaign and today is a good thing. I've said a ton of times that there are genuine reasons to support a Trump presidency but that doesn't mean you have to stubbornly defend each and every questionable action or statement he makes [QUOTE=Tudd;51758078]Well that's the problem, I simply don't see it like that. And that's why we have this fundamental disconnect. I think the true answer is always something closer in the middle of two biased sources, and that is perhaps why I am so interested in posting news and sources that fundamentally oppose the popular opinion here.[/QUOTE] You don't often post news, most of your posts these days tend to be cherrypicked videos of "leftists" that you then use a as a launchpad to generalize said leftists. You don't seem merely interested in providing a counter-viewpoint, you want to actively push the narrative that the left is intrinsically violent and irrational, as if one day you are just going to shatter the conditioning and everyone on FP will start loving Trump and the GOP. More to the point, like Duck M said, this isn't the answer. If you think reporting is inaccurate because of a left-leaning stance, prove it wrong without resorting to sources you know are untrustworthy.

[QUOTE=Toothpick;51758115]What makes you think he's a good president, seeing as you most likely have agreed with every action he's made so far?[/QUOTE] I think this election is not ideal for any side first off. My opinions on Hilary are obviously much lower than the typical user on here, but to why specifically I think Trump could be a good president? Overall I like his policies (not always the ideal), and think he is sincerely motivated for America, and not for personal greed as others suggest. The guy has been saying the same things he is advocating since the 80's, so I do not buy this idea that he only did this to boost his brand. I do want stronger borders, sensible deregulation, a new approach to foreign politics than Obamas (but not like the Neo-con Bush era), new limits and rules on Washngton DC, and a bunch of other stuff if we got specific on an issue. I think Trump is so far is heading in the right direction on these issues, and I see alot of the reaction is hyperbolic compared to the scales of what previous presidents had done similarly in the past. Just ask specifically, and I can get deeper into that compared to this very general overview.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51757880]I would like to chime in on something. I think it is important to realise that I am not right on every argument, but I am putting my opinon out here knowing full well that the demographics are going against me on popular opinion. I have my strong arguments and my weak ones, just like everyone else. And I do talk to people who treat me with respect the respect I owe them. That one thread about the ban is a good example of how not to have a political discourse. Nagging, labeling me a fascist-nazi-xenophobe-racist-unamerican individual, switching the topics with "Tudd answer this." is why I don't feel inclined to engage with anyone in that thread specifically.[/QUOTE] I don't think you are a fascist nazi xenophobe racist unamerican individual but I think you go above and beyond in trying to defend, deflect, and protect someone who is doing some somewhat fascistic and xenophobic shit. You are also reaping what you sowed for months in trying to sell people on Trump. When you tell people that Trump is going to be great for America and he starts doing things that most people see as not that great, yeah, people are going to bring you up. RIPBILLYMAYS dealt with that shit before he more or less stopped posting. The difference is you just switched from Trump support to bashing the left. [QUOTE=Tudd;51757880]But I can handle that, and actually doesn't piss me off. If I didn't want it to I would just leave. What does make me frustrated, is watching the same people shit on moderates/centrists who have a more neutral position or "appears" to support Trump in the same ways. I have seen multiple people in the middle of bandwagon say, "Fuck this, I hope Trump wins" because they got so sick of the hyperbolic whining or ridiculous reactions to news. I get several PMs and wall messages of people who tell me, "I really don't agree with you, but keep doing it and those guys are ridiculous" so I know this is coming from somewhere that would otherwise rather not deal with me. So my message is, don't think everyone is watching you with envied eyes when you call me a Fascist, or destroy someone with centrist view cause they can't hold a "balanced view" according to you. The people who do this are counter-actively making people disagree/move away from these views you hold.[/QUOTE] Base concern trolling. If I wanted to be a dick I'd bring up the ratings and responses you get from the rest of the board. [QUOTE=Tudd;51758288]I think this election is not ideal for any side first off. My opinions on Hilary are obviously much lower than the typical user on here[/QUOTE] You and others [I]drastically [/I]overstate FP's love of Clinton. I caught as much if not more shit than you did particularly around the Democratic National Convention for supporting Clinton. [QUOTE=Tudd;51758288]but to why specifically I think Trump could be a good president? Overall I like his policies (not always the ideal), and think he is sincerely motivated for America, and not for personal greed as others suggest. The guy has been saying the same things he is advocating since the 80's, so I do not buy this idea that he only did this to boost his brand.[/QUOTE] "Personal greed" and "boosting his brand" are weak arguments. He has stood by some things he said in the 80s while doing complete 180s on campaign promises. What policies aren't ideal, considering you said he has done literally nothing wrong yet? [QUOTE=Tudd;51758288]I do want stronger borders, sensible deregulation, a new approach to foreign politics than Obamas (but not like the Neo-con Bush era), new limits and rules on Washngton DC, and a bunch of other stuff if we got specific on an issue. I think Trump is so far is heading in the right direction on these issues, and I see alot of the reaction is hyperbolic compared to the scales of what previous presidents had done similarly in the past. Just ask specifically, and I can get deeper into that compared to this very general overview.[/QUOTE] The problem with "sensible deregulation" is the same problem with "common sense gun regulation". It's rarely that sensible and could cover basically anything you want. You've done a very poor job of convincing us that the reaction to Trump's actions is hyperbolic. I see a handful of hyperbolic posts in any given thread about him but the general reaction doesn't seem particularly exaggerated. Maybe in comparison to whatever other communities you habitat.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51758285] You don't often post news, most of your posts these days tend to be cherrypicked videos of "leftists" that you then use a as a launchpad to generalize said leftists. You don't seem merely interested in providing a counter-viewpoint, you want to actively push the narrative that the left is intrinsically violent and irrational, as if one day you are just going to shatter the conditioning and everyone on FP will start loving Trump and the GOP. More to the point, like Duck M said, this isn't the answer. If you think reporting is inaccurate because of a left-leaning stance, prove it wrong without resorting to sources you know are untrustworthy.[/QUOTE] Well that's an interesting point. Is it really cherry picking if it happens so frequently? Isn't it worrying that this harmful behavior is appearing on the left side of politics more than the right as far as I can search and I think others notice? I think you might be minimizing what is really going with a highly reactive hard left that trends with protest/riots over every action they don't like despite in recent past similar measures being implemented. Also how our my sources untrustworthy besides a dailycaller source and a townshall source I posted in SH? Which I have corrected myself afterwards to not use those sources. The overwhelming majority of my SH threads use reputable sources and their own titles, but deal with the topics others simply don't post. Most of the content I post in the videos section is raw video unless it is an obvious political pundit just like an Keith Olbermann or Trevor Noah. I post stuff that is biased towards mine and other views and I don't apologize for it. Other people post this content too (like Keith Olbermann), and you don't see me asking for mods to ban them, reporting them like an idiot, or saying never post that again. So why can't I post content I like as long as it is within the rules?

[QUOTE=Tudd;51758364]Well that's an interesting point. Is it really cherry picking if it happens so frequently? Isn't it worrying that this harmful behavior is appearing on the left side of politics more than the right as far as I can search and I think others notice? I think you might be minimizing what is really going with a highly reactive hard left that trends with protest/riots over every action they don't like despite in recent past similar measures being implemented.[/QUOTE] Obviously it depends on the topic but the inauguration protests were clearly cherrypicked. Out of hundreds of thousands (millions?) of people you manage to find a handful of videos where "leftists" act unruly and uncouth. It "happens frequently" because you are on the lookout for it or actively engage in communities that share that sort of content. So if similar things to what Trump has done or said have occurred in the recent past, why are so many people that upset? What's your theory? [QUOTE=Tudd;51758364]Also how our my sources untrustworthy besides a dailycaller source and a townshall source I posted in SH? Which I have corrected myself afterwards to not use those sources. The overwhelming majority of my SH threads use reputable sources and their own titles, but deal with the topics others simply don't post.[/QUOTE] So what do you mean by using biased sources to counter biased sources? [QUOTE=Tudd;51758364]Most of the content I post in the videos section is raw video unless it is an obvious political pundit just like an Keith Olbermann or Trevor Noah.[/QUOTE] I'm not blind Tudd. I don't need a right-winger shouting at my face to understand the motivations behind the things you post. [QUOTE=Tudd;51758364]I post stuff that is biased towards mine and other views and I don't apologize for it. Other people post this content too (like Keith Olbermann), and you don't see me asking for mods to ban them, reporting them like an idiot, or saying never post that again. So why can't I post content I like as long as it is within the rules?[/QUOTE] I've said that you shouldn't be banned, I don't think I've reported a post you made, and I've outright said you should be allowed to post again so I dunno why you are asking me.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51758364]I post stuff that is biased towards mine and other views and I don't apologize for it. Other people post this content too (like Keith Olbermann), and you don't see me asking for mods to ban them, reporting them like an idiot, or saying never post that again. So why can't I post content I like as long as it is within the rules?[/QUOTE] You probably shouldn't get reported or shat on as much as you do but people have definitely asked for Keith Olbermann to stop getting posted. :v: Personally I think you're a cultured and intelligent dude, capable of a good discussion. But that just makes the views you hold even more bewildering to me.

[QUOTE=CertainDOOM;51758426]You probably shouldn't get reported or shat on as much as you do but people have definitely asked for Keith Olbermann to stop getting posted. :v: [/QUOTE] Yeah Judas was building box forts on the opposite side of the meme battlefield from Tudd for posting all those Olbermann vids. [editline]31st January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;51758266]lol this is getting dumbed but I 100% agree and I'm unsure why the majority would find this a dumb opinion. Tudd is [I]absolutely[/I] hated for his political views. As someone who browses SH every day and tries to delve into nearly every thread I can, among the [I]dozens[/I] of Trump threads [B](nearly never started by Tudd himself)[/B], you see the same pattern emerge.[/QUOTE] Again, he is probably catching shit for his far-right political views. I've seen many, many genuinely good posts and arguments made from the right that get trashed on the most asinine grounds. Shit sucks and I wish it didn't happen. That said, again, it's not just due to his political views, it's due to the fact that he evangelized for a presidential candidate so hard ans for so long who is now doing things that most people on FP (most people in America and Britain) find highly questionable. Regarding bolded, because it's hard to make positive news of Trump's presidency right now and Tudd knows it :v: [QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;51758266]lWhen Tudd does reply, he gets dogpiled by dozens of people all saying different arguments, and if Tudd dares to not reply to even one of those arguments, he's spammed with nothing else but "Answer the question, Tudd."[/QUOTE] So how many people are allowed to reply to Tudd if he says something many people disagree with? I keep seeing the word dogpile and I want to know a specific number in case I show up late to a thread. [QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;51758266]lTudd, like any reasonable human being of any political affiliation, taps out of these threads because fuck that toxicity, right? Then everyone just wanks in a circle to themselves while they repeat how Tudd refuses to answer any arguments and he's clearly a retard. [/QUOTE] There is toxicity at times but "Tudd told me Trump would do X and now he is doing Y" isn't very toxic. And I don't think Tudd is getting called a retard considering even mentioning him gets you a ban now. So there, the mods agree with you. [QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;51758266]lTudd's fucking right, guys. He manages to appear as the arbiter of civil discussion and discourse to the centralists and middle-grounders of the discussion. I am [I]not[/I] a trump supporter in any way and I cannot personally fathom that many positives to it, but I find myself more engaged in trying to defuse rampart Tudd hate in SH more than I am discussing the topics.[/QUOTE] More concern trolling. He does seem civil when he posts in SH. Then he does an end run to this section to show an individual or a group of individuals doing something dumb. [QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;51758266]lLike seriously half of you guys have this problem with "I just can't understand why someone as smart as him would back someone as dumb as trump!" and I think your [I]actual[/I] problem with that is it destroys your narrative of every trump supporter being a drooling retard/redneck/KKK member.[/QUOTE] I don't think every Trump supporter is a drooling retard or vicious racist. I've said before that most I know in real life (and I have to talk to 12 Republicans before I find my first Democrat) are good people.

[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;51758266]Inherently and fundamentally outrageous news article is posted, a few 50 star + mindless posts all saying the same thing (woOW trump is a nazi!!) before someone says "WELL, TUDD???" at the end of one of their posts and suddenly the entire thread is expecting Tudd replies.[/QUOTE] I'm starting to ban these sorts of posts. The election is over, and people need to get over it. I don't like Trump or his policies, but I would like to at least have normal conversations with Tudd & others, without toxic posters pushing them out. Some of the recent threads in SH have just been truly embarrassing.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51758448]Yeah Judas was building box forts on the opposite side of the meme battlefield from Tudd for posting all those Olbermann vids.[/QUOTE] I honestly think Judas is worse than Tudd because he comes across as a jackass.

There are plenty of people with legitimately delusional opinions, like Cinnamonbun, or Wystan, that are actually harmful to society as a whole and pretend that they're some kind of tragic victim of a vocal minority or some dumb shit because people call them out for believing torture is ok / landmining civilians and breaking international law is OK. but some people would have you think people who merely disagree with their exact political ideal's are the real dickheads I'd rather people focused a little less on people who just disagree and more on people who actually say shit that is /harmful/ Like Tudd seems pretty normal. Especially when you consider he could be defending land-mining children and torturing muslims but isn't even close to that crazy.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51758626]I honestly think Judas is worse than Tudd because he comes across as a jackass.[/QUOTE] I've seen Tudd be friendly with people he disagrees with. I've never seen that from Judas

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51758403] So what do you mean by using biased sources to counter biased sources? [/quote] If you look at my posts before the election, I was pretty damn diligent to appear unbiased. I think with the polarization of of this election and how ridiculous some of the left are on this site, I am now up to stick my neck up on the other side despite me being way closer to the center than a typical conservative. [quote] I've said that you shouldn't be banned, I don't think I've reported a post you made, and I've outright said you should be allowed to post again so I dunno why you are asking me.[/QUOTE] All rhetorically pointed at others, not to you specifically. And thanks, that's why I actually like you overall despite deeply disagreeing with you. [editline]31st January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Raidyr;51758333] Base concern trolling. If I wanted to be a dick I'd bring up the ratings and responses you get from the rest of the board. You and others [I]drastically [/I]overstate FP's love of Clinton. I caught as much if not more shit than you did particularly around the Democratic National Convention for supporting Clinton. "Personal greed" and "boosting his brand" are weak arguments. He has stood by some things he said in the 80s while doing complete 180s on campaign promises. What policies aren't ideal, considering you said he has done literally nothing wrong yet? The problem with "sensible deregulation" is the same problem with "common sense gun regulation". It's rarely that sensible and could cover basically anything you want. You've done a very poor job of convincing us that the reaction to Trump's actions is hyperbolic. I see a handful of hyperbolic posts in any given thread about him but the general reaction doesn't seem particularly exaggerated. Maybe in comparison to whatever other communities you habitat.[/QUOTE] To be fair on all that, I did say in my post that I was generalizing like crazy, but if he wanted to specific we could.

I have no problems with the interpersonal aspect of "Tudd", he seems like a nice guy to talk to. What we have a problem with is he is so adamant on being a part of a pretty objectively terrible thing seemingly only for jokes. When proded he never gives clear and concise views on the topics, he just continuously references how he's the only guy pushing the right and how he's righteous for doing so. It's hard to believe he actually thinks what he's done in terms domestic policy has been acceptable; and it's only been 11 days since he's been in office. It really is baffling how he cannot see the gangster in Donald Trump. It's simply the fact he acts like he's not part of the objectively worse group. Hell, I wouldn't even care about it if his posts were not constant and only about one topic. It's as if he's advertising. I'm not saying he should change his views or life/whatever it might sound like, just stop spamming the same nonsense as if it really speaks for everyone.

I just realised something... I think Tudd has become our new milkandcooki. Honestly, I don't hate the guy, I just wish he would quit pushing his ideology 24/7.

I think it's okay for Tudd to share his opinions, and it's okay for people to challenge his opinions with their opinions. I think it's okay for people to vote for whomever they want, because if we're going to live in a free world with free choice and free will, then people are free to be stupid. This is all okay, so relax. But everyone on this earth has to accept one thing, they will be challenged by those who oppose them, and they should be open to that challenge and ready to challenge it back. Just because someone has a shit argument doesn't make them a shit person. It's their actions that really define them. I'd say the worst thing Tudd has done, physically, was voting for Trump, and hell, that's not much of a crime I'd say. He hasn't been genuinely hostile, he just seems a little misguided at worst.

[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;51758866]I just realised something... I think Tudd has become our new milkandcooki. Honestly, I don't hate the guy, I just wish he would quit pushing his ideology 24/7.[/QUOTE] More like Yawmwen or thisispain, only now its trump instead of either meth/anarchy, or feminism/whatever thisispain was about Milkncooki was just a really big idiot and creep

[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;51758866]I just realised something... I think Tudd has become our new milkandcooki. Honestly, I don't hate the guy, I just wish he would quit pushing his ideology 24/7.[/QUOTE] Can you elaborate on that? I searched for milkandcooki on google and the first thing that showed up was some furry vore stuff ...

[QUOTE=Gorgus;51758916]Can you elaborate on that? I searched for milkandcooki on google and the first things that showed up was some furry vore stuff ...[/QUOTE] I think you got the gist of it.

Doesn't help I been to a furry convention twice. Not a furry though, just was on safari and observing furries in their natural habitat.

[QUOTE=Gorgus;51758916]Can you elaborate on that? I searched for milkandcooki on google and the first things that showed up was some furry vore stuff ...[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=milkandcooki;47999054]my point here is that the cops rarely, or never, do this with non-white people. if this dude was brown or black he'd be executed immediately, whereas white murderers usually get taken in without violence. it happens all the time. like, what's the science behind this? how did they manage to take in heavily armed james holmes? or jeffrey dahmer? craig stephen? [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitpost/troll" - OvB))[/highlight] [highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Extended because garry b-day unban" - OvB))[/highlight][/QUOTE] [QUOTE][QUOTE][URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1260328&p=46304108&viewfull=1#post46304108"]a vore station, now i've seen everything[/URL][/QUOTE]Surprisingly, it's actually really well done. You aggressive grab somebody, then click yourself and you put them... wherever you choose. You can choose whether or not to let somebody escape so you can use it for murder if you want, or as an easier way to carry corpses. One time I was on the mining rock with someone and there wasn't enough suits so I just carried them that way through space. Lots of people use it to jerk off but they're usually assistants hiding around in dorms and shit. There's a bunch of serverwide rules discouraging taking high importance roles while wanting to fuck around, because if the engineers or doctors are fucking you can't exactly have a functioning station. Since most of the users are from some vore club on SL we just kinda roll with it. That's how most of the players met each other, so it's kind of fitting to have it in. The majority of the server's population only uses the mechanic to fuck around near the end of the round, but other than that it goes largely ignored. There ARE a few guys who fuck around only wanting to get ate, like the guy I mentioned on the last page who spaces himself or kills people if nobody wants to. If anyone hasn't been COMPLETELY grossed out by now, shoot me a PM and I can get you the IP if you want. Edited: also you can milk your boobs so you can make infinite cheese if you've got a container with 5 enzyme in it. one chick did that and we had to evacuate the station because there were literally no free floor tiles anywhere. (User was banned for this post ("Don't talk about fetishes in a thread about a video game. Don't." - Seiteki))[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=milkandcooki;42261949]why in the fuck would that even matter at all? what i touch my dick to has nothing to with how i feel about women or men, especially considering that i only jerk it to fictional animal porn. i know you're trying to pull off some epic zinger about how we're all big hypocrites, but at least [I]think[/I] before you post ps sorry about the 9 hour late response, i was busy all day [editline]21st September 2013[/editline] really no point in saying this when you consider that half of the geniuses in this thread haven't even read the article. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Creepy" - Craptasket))[/highlight][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=windows098;51753039]I don't agree with him politically, but you should never hate someone because of politics. We all have our own opinions. Politics is just what people believe in, and you should respect that.[/QUOTE] I don't hate Tudd because of his political viewpoints, I hate Tudd because of how he argues his political viewpoints. Instead of actually providing logical points to each and every argument, all he does is blindly make generalize attacks on "Leftism" and lies, obfuscates, and attempts to deflect whenever someone actually makes a good argument against him, before finally silently leaving the thread with his tail between his legs once people have realized how shit of an argument he actually has and thus make up multiple points to refute it. It's the same pattern with any Trump supporter, Tudd just hasn't been banned yet because he doesn't talk racist or inflammatory crap a lot of other do, and I am glad that he doesn't, but he still follows the Trumpet pattern. Now of course he'll try and say otherwise, generalizing all his posts as not being like so, perhaps even pointing to a few cherrypicked examples when Trump was being somewhat reasonable and thus Tudd was able to stick around and actually have an argument. [editline]31st January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;51758103]Hey [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1550869&p=51756911&viewfull=1#post51756911]look[/url], a thread where I have a disagreement with (with the classic "Trump Supporters, how do you defend this!"), state my opinon on what's wrong, don't antagonize the person who posted it, and we came out with a more positive discourse.[/QUOTE] Point proven. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("'Trumpet' memeshit" - rilez))[/highlight]