It was embarrassingly shitty--ESPECIALLY that soundtrack.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 05, 2016, 10:04:47 PM

Quote from: MyNameIsCharlie on December 05, 2016, 09:15:45 PM

Quote from: PSU on December 05, 2016, 08:41:00 PM

Agreed anyone against legalizing marijuana has to be retarded.

I don't know about everyone. There are some very valid reasons to be against it. It's just some of the old guard conservatives tend to fall back on the slippery slope of pot being a gateway, or misidentifying it as a hard core narcotic like heroin.

It IS a gateway. The thing is, that's not a valid reason for it to be illegal.

Not a gateway at all.

This is the kind of argument where I only need to cite one person to prove it wrong.

Quote from: Iberian Husky on December 05, 2016, 05:41:05 PM

/vp/ is based and figured out the Magearna distribution QR code. Scan this with the QR scanner in SM and you can get Magearna!

Got a non-4chan pic?

White genocide when?

Quote from: Jono on December 04, 2016, 02:49:47 AM

Still haven't played the first one

The Road with mushroom zombies.

jono doesn't read

Killing all the players does in a sense prevent them from ever losing the game, but does nothing to help a living player win, so to speak.

Not exactly. A cornerstone of my philosophy is Benatar's asymmetry--which you may or may not be familiar with already. Benatar posits that positive and negative sensations are not balanced out by each other. While the absence of negative sensation (pain, suffering, discomfort) could be described as a "good" thing, it's not necessarily a bad thing to not experience pleasure.

If you could place pain and pleasure on a number line, you could define pain as (-1) and pleasure as (+1). Following Benatar's asymmetry, you would define the absence of pain as (+1) and the absence of pleasure as (0). It's neutral--it's neither good nor bad. Therefore, if there were no people to experience pain or pleasure, your number line does not rest at (0)--it rests at (+1), because the goodness of the absence of negative sensation in the universe infinitely outweighs the neutrality of the absence of positive sensation.

In other words, it is imperative to quell negative sensation. It is NOT imperative to perpetuate positive sensation. I would sacrifice all the happiness in the world if it meant that no one would ever have to feel pain again--because gross universal happiness does not outweigh gross universal suffering--in fact, it's a philosophical impossibility.

Hopefully that makes sense.

In the case of aborting a disabled or otherwise retarded child, yes it's very Eugenically responsible. In the case of aborting because "oops forgot the condom", then it's a case of having your orgasm and eating it too. It's allowing someone to make incredibly poor plans and decisions (with all the contraceptives available and knowledge of female menstrual cycles, you have no excuse for getting pregnant on accident). Very irresponsible in that case.

Here's an axiom for you: If you're not responsible enough to take contraceptive measures, you're not responsible enough to be a parent. All the more reason to have an abortion. There's no such thing as an irresponsible abortion--even if you're aborting the child for irresponsible reasons, practically speaking, it's still a responsible decision.

Why subject an innocent child to 18+ years of squalor just because his or her parents made a stupid decision? That's the question you need to be asking yourself. It's not about the parents--it's about the child. As much as you seem to care about the welfare of these wantonly-produced babies, you don't seem to care very much about their welfare at all. It seems like you're more concerned with punishment, for some deranged reason.

Eh, I don't see how you could balance allowing sluts to get away with anything slutty, and also having everyone ostracize them. Unless I've misread your post, I had to re-read it a few times.

People are going to do whatever kind of shit they want and nobody is going to stop them. Doesn't matter what the law says not to do--they'll do it anyway because they don't know what's best for them. The best thing we can do is educate and teach people the risks associated with licentious behavior--and if that doesn't deter them, that's their own problem.

The bottom line is that promiscuity is not and should never be classified as a crime. It doesn't hurt anybody. You can argue that it hurts society, but I don't have much of a reason to care about society. It's already fucked and I think it deserves to be fucked further--especially after the election.

What would you say about a hypothetical "anti natalism gene" that turns anyone who has it into you ideologically?

Sounds like a good deal to me. Though I'd prefer it if people would just come to grips with it on their own.

Orgasms literally exists as a way to bribe animals into reproducing, it's a drug hit that can only be justified (from a non- anti natalist perspective) by following it up with offspring. Anti natalism has no justification for or against non-reproductive sex.

False. To be an anti-natalist, you essentially have to concede a bundle of other philosophical stances--namely that life sucks ass. Therefore, if you can find a harmless activity that you can do for fun just to prevent yourself from going insane or killing yourself, it's encouraged to do that thing. Sex happens to be one of those things. Humans need enjoyment and happiness in their lives, so to have safe, responsible, consensual, babyless sex with a significant other is encouraged.

That's the justification: Life sucks; do what you can to make it not suck (while taking care not to make it suck more for others).

you don't have any problem with abortion, so you shouldn't have a problem with ancestors aborting would be anti-natalists.

Well, that's the thing--the only issue I have with life is that you're forced into it. If we could somehow ask our unborn children if they'd be okay with living in this shithole, I wouldn't have any issue with procreation whatsoever.

"Anti-natalists" are those individuals who would have given a hearty "fuck no" to that question, so logically speaking, I suppose I'd be perfectly okay with that. If all would-be anti-natalists were aborted, that is.

You can't verify something like that before someone is born, though, so it's kind of a moot point.

This statement also implies that society should survive. It shouldn't.

It really goes back to the search for a non-trivial solution to human life. Of course I also hate people that just shit out children without thinking it through (and by that I mean niggers). Call me selfish, but I can just as easily flip this back at you for forcing your moralisms on everyone else.[/quote]Is that what I'm doing? I can't force anything on anybody--I thought we were just having a conversation.

Again, a situation in which society collapses is both boring and trivial

I mean, says you, right? I think it would be glorious, and as a lion, I'm not terribly concerned with the opinions of the sheep, if you catch my drift.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 05, 2016, 12:08:20 PM

If your only goal right now is to make an E4-ready team, this should set you up nicely. If you ever wanted to make a competitive team, you'd frankly have to go through a complete overhaul--we all do.

Lycanroc was actually my top candidate, too. I'm kind of bummed that I'm currently lacking any legendaries in my party though; as a kid I always loved getting a really strong Pokemon just prior to going through the league.

As for moves, what're your thoughts on 120+ power moves with 5 pp?

Use your PP Ups/PP Maxes to bring it up to 8.

I'd be more worried about their accuracy than their PP, though. While powerful, they have a tendency to miss at the most inopportune of moments. If you want to use them, you can always use Leppa Berries or Ethers between fights (you should have plenty). I always prefer to stick with perfectly accurate moves, but it's your call.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 04, 2016, 09:07:36 PM

Current team:

Decidueye (Brave Bird, Leaf Blade, Spirit Shackle, Sucker Punch, & Decidium Z)
Salazzle (Flamethrower, Toxic, Venoshock, Dragon Claw, & Poison Barb)
Vikavolt (Thunderbolt, Dig, Crunch, X-Scissor, & Silver Powder)
Greninja (Water Shuriken, Aerial Ace, Extrasensory, Night Slash, & Water Z)
Gengar (Dark Pulse, Payback, Hex, Dream Eater [haven't put much effort into this moveset)
Parasect (Slash, Spore, Giga Drain, False Swipe, & Quick Claw)

Parasect is my false swiper, so I've been leveling him as I go but I think he needs to go, and I've been playing with Greninja just for kicks. Any recommended substitutions? I'm heading up the mountain to the E4.

There's a move reminder in the PMC that you should talk to if you have any Heart Scales. If you don't, you can get them randomly by fishing or eating at diners (always choose the most expensive option--you'll get a surprise). Once you speak to her, you'll be given the option to teach your team some moves they never knew before--this is because some evolved forms learn some unique attacks at level 1, which can only be accessed through the move reminder.

Decidueye: I used Grass Knot over Leaf Blade, personally. One-shots anything that's heavy and is weak to it.
Salazzle: I'd replace Venoshock with Sludge Bomb/Wave--they're a little less situational, but none are bad choices.
Vikavolt: Replace Crunch with Bug Buzz. If you're playing on set (probably not), consider using Volt Switch.
Greninja: Looks all right.
Gengar: Shadow Ball and Sludge Bomb/Wave are mandatory--nix Payback and Dream Eater. Consider using Psychic.

As for Parasect, it's cool that you took one this far--but I think you'll struggle to make use of him at the E4. If you don't want to retire it, replace Slash with X-Scissor and Giga Drain with Seed Bomb (if you can--I'm not even sure). Parasect has lamentable special attack, so any healing from Giga Drain probably won't do you much good. Use Synthesis for that instead.

If you're looking to replace Parasect--frankly, you'd be better off with just about anything, haha. You already have yourself a Grass-type and Bug-type. You also have a lot of special attackers, so maybe it wouldn't hurt to introduce a physical attacker as well--perhaps a Lycanroc (day form)? If you're playing Moon, you can find Lycanroc in their midday forms in the Vast Poni Canyon. It has Stealth Rock and Accelerock, which you might find useful since you lack any fast Rock-type coverage--just be wary, because pure Rock-types are glass cannons by nature.

If your only goal right now is to make an E4-ready team, this should set you up nicely. If you ever wanted to make a competitive team, you'd frankly have to go through a complete overhaul--we all do.

haven't in 7-8 months

I don't really get a sense of dread from staying in one place for an extended period of time. I've been on YouTube for ten years, and I'll be there for ten more. So what?

Quote from: Verbatim on December 04, 2016, 10:06:31 PM

Quote from: Yang on December 04, 2016, 09:56:33 PM

I feel like people should begin to clarify when they say "drugs" because drugs can be stuff like Tylenol or Ibuprofen, not just weed.

Tylenol and any other harmless thing out there.

Tylenol is far from harmless.

I'm well-aware.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 03, 2016, 09:36:23 PM

Quote from: ⚡ Thunder on December 03, 2016, 09:28:32 PM

KAZUNOKO!!!

you saw earlier when K-Brad beat Daigo, right?

fuck no i didnt!

Here it is. So many upsets.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 04, 2016, 10:06:31 PM

I do hate all drugs, including Tylenol and any other harmless thing out there (I have a special hatred for anti-depressants).

They're just a symbol of human fragility.

Do you disprove of all medicinal drugs (in particular anesthesia inducing drugs for surgery)? I think recreational drugs are a complete waste of human life, but I don't see a problem in chemically treating some problems.

Yes, all drugs, including medicinal ones like anesthesia.

It's not that I "disapprove" of them--I just lament the fact that humans need and rely so heavily on them in the first place.

The entire abortion debate always skips over the real question and focuses on a pointless technicality, the discussion here is not "at what point does a fetus become human, and who can claim legal authority over it?", no, the discussion is meant to be "Should people be held responsible for their actions, and should society encourage people to avoid self destructive behavior, especially if it leads to societal collapse?".

Yes, people should be held responsible for their actions.

Abortion is one of the most responsible decisions a person could ever make.

Specifically, "Should women face repercussions for being sluts,

The repercussions are social ostracization--that's all there needs to be.

and should society reinforce traditional family oriented lifestyles?"

Absolutely not.

Because that's all this boils down to, should women be allowed to fuck whoever they want whenever they want with little regard to it's effects on a society

Yes.

or should a patriarchal authority slap some sense into them and encourage them to get married and have children instead?

Never.

All the focus on "but what if she's raped? but what if the baby's disabled? but what if x?" Is a deliberate distraction to avoid talking about the fact that when you encourage abortions for everyone, you change the culture to one where sluts are allowed to get away with anything.

Which is for the better--except that sluts would still be ostracized, and that's a good thing.

>but what about men? men can sleep around so why not women?
It's a good question but always asked for the wrong reasons. Men should be held to a high standard since it's their job to keep the women and children in line

Nope. If anything, women should keep men in line.

but this counter point is always brought up as "men and women are equal, so both should be allowed to be sluts" Wrong, they're not equal, but they both need to be chaste for society to function.

If they both need to be chaste in order for society to function, which I agree with, that is still equality. The freedom for both sexes to do whatever they want with their bodies is also equality.

>it's my body my choice, who gave you the authority to control me?
Who gave you the authority to piss away your genes and fuck your society into oblivion?

Genes should be pissed away, and society should be fucked into oblivion.

Actions have consequences and the second a society thinks about raising families and instead being a hedonist

This has so little to do with hedonism, it's insane. It's more hedonistic to want children. It's less hedonistic to save a child from having a life--which is the greatest thing a human being could ever possibly do.

Okay, now I'm injecting anti-natalism into this. For sure.

so tell me sluts, why should you be allowed to destroy everything your ancestors built for you?

I can't speak for sluts because I'm not one, but why shouldn't they be able to destroy everything their ancestors "built for them"? Everything our ancestors built for us fucking sucks. If anything, we should make abortions an Olympic sport. Whoever can have the most abortions in a year wins a gold medal. It should be celebrated.

>why can't i live an alternative lifestyle that doesn't revolve around kids? where's the freedom in that?
Show me one, just one, society that survived after indulging in all it's hedonistic desires.

Again, this isn't about hedonism. It is more hedonistic to live in a society where children are wantonly born into a shit world, because you have this ego problem where you want your genes to be spread for generations for some selfish, arbitrary reason.

This statement also implies that society should survive. It shouldn't.

Really you have to ask yourself, why am I even having sex with this person in the first place? if your answer is anything other than "because I'm growing closer to them so we can better raise our kids together" then you've missed the point of sex entirely and are just thinking with your dick.

No intelligent, rational person cares about the biological "point" of sex, and they shouldn't.

#KillAllBabies.

Drugs are a pretty terrible thing.