39331
The Flood / Re: Think of 12 users before entering.
« on: May 04, 2015, 09:04:54 AM »
I anticipated some stupid joke, so I didn't think of any.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to. 39331
The Flood / Re: Think of 12 users before entering.« on: May 04, 2015, 09:04:54 AM »
I anticipated some stupid joke, so I didn't think of any.
39332
The Flood / Re: >people giving AoU 6/10 reviews« on: May 04, 2015, 08:40:16 AM »That has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of Marvel movies and does nothing to refute any of his claims.yes it does Quote Also considering that you dismiss entire artistic mediums based on rather superficial thingsno i don't 39333
The Flood / Re: holy crap i just realized that another is just an and other together« on: May 03, 2015, 10:57:00 PM »
"slang" is slang for "shortened language"
39334
The Flood / Re: itt: post shit you have that you bet others dont« on: May 03, 2015, 10:53:34 PM »
Personality
39335
The Flood / Re: Tropes you despise« on: May 03, 2015, 10:44:15 PM »
When a cool character shows up during a show, only to never make a reappearance in the future. Not sure if there's a TV Tropes trope for it.
39336
The Flood / Re: Tropes you despise« on: May 03, 2015, 10:32:24 PM »nooo, that's not really what it isOhhhhhhhhhhhh"Woe is me, I'm so miserable." characters that are pushed along through a plot like little angels.Mary Sues.Wat a mary sue is someone who seems too pristine for the audience to give a fuck like... augustus waters from the fault in our stars 39337
The Flood / Re: Tropes you despise« on: May 03, 2015, 10:30:18 PM »Mary Sues.forgot that one but i mean, eh, no one likes a mary sue 39338
The Flood / Re: Tropes you despise« on: May 03, 2015, 10:29:25 PM »
Oh, here we go.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Fanservice http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Gainaxing http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HotterAndSexier http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Laconic/Stripperiffic http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AgeInappropriateDress http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BuxomIsBetter http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GagBoobs http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MsFanservice http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Badass http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Flanderization http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HoYay http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HumongousMecha http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Fanon http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarkerAndEdgier (when done poorly) http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeadHorseTrope (of course) http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TitleDrop (when done poorly) http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoesThisRemindYouOfAnything http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BreakingTheFourthWall (unless done well) http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Moe http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoreDakka http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MundaneMadeAwesome http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AesopAmnesia http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BagOfSpilling http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeusExMachina http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LaserGuidedAmnesia An easy way to say it is this: Any trope associated with the character Yoko Littner is a trope that I absolutely abhor. Plus a few others. And many more that I'm likely forgetting. 39339
The Flood / Re: >people giving AoU 6/10 reviews« on: May 03, 2015, 10:11:16 PM »ghost in the shell is one of the greatest pieces of scifi to ever grace the world of artspoken like a true pretentious weeb 39340
The Flood / Re: >people giving AoU 6/10 reviews« on: May 03, 2015, 09:00:28 PM »It was great. My only complaints would be that I don't think this movie should had to set up half the movies in phase 3 and I thought they went a little overboard with the humor in this one, but maybe that was just due to the atmosphere of the Thursday night premiere crowd. I'd like to see it again and see if it's still a problem. I loved everything else so overall I'd probably rate it a 8/10.I had the opposite impression--there wasn't more or less humor than in the first Avengers movie, and a lot of the jokes fell flat for me this time. 39341
The Flood / Re: >people giving AoU 6/10 reviews« on: May 03, 2015, 08:58:13 PM »is marvel impervious to criticism from you peopleyou liked ghost in the shell, guy 39343
The Flood / Re: ITT: Post good beers.« on: May 03, 2015, 08:39:53 PM »There is no such thing as a good beer. 39344
Serious / Re: Out of the announced / potential 2016 canidates who does Sep7 favor so far?« on: May 03, 2015, 08:39:19 PM »
Most likely a third party, as always.
#WasteMyVote #Integrity 39345
The Flood / Re: So this one guy comes into a bar...« on: May 03, 2015, 08:36:11 PM »
a skeleton walks into a bar
Spoiler he asks for a beer Spoiler and a mop 39346
The Flood / Re: >people giving AoU 6/10 reviews« on: May 03, 2015, 08:34:42 PM »Ah, that's right. Still a cool scene. Spoiler I'd still say Thor's Hammer is pretty heavy on its own, though <_< ![]() 39347
The Flood / Re: >people giving AoU 6/10 reviews« on: May 03, 2015, 08:23:41 PM »
OH. And I was super impressed with how they didn't sexualize Scarlet Witch at all. Always a plus.
39348
The Flood / Re: >people giving AoU 6/10 reviews« on: May 03, 2015, 08:19:58 PM »
Just came back. Enjoyed it. I'd say it's about on par with the last film.
Favorite Avenger is still Hawkeye, even though I really had to stretch my imagination to make sense of the fact that he is at all capable of holding his own against Ultron with just his arrows. I thought they introduced way too many new superheroes in this one, and it makes sense that Spoiler they would kill off Quicksilver, because otherwise, that's just a fuck-ton of characters to keep track of. It sucks that that's probably the only real reason, though. I wasn't digging the Bruce/Natasha romance scenes. My favorite scene was when they're all at the party, and they're all trying to pick up Thor's hammer, and none of them can do it. Spoiler Turns into a beautiful Chekhov's Gun/Brick Joke much later, where this new Avenger (I don't know his name, because they never do name him) is created, and after explaining his purpose, he nonchalantly picks up Thor's hammer and passes it to a bemused Thor. You know, to show us how powerful he is. That was cool. Overall, 7/10. 39349
The Flood / Re: If you could be any food« on: May 03, 2015, 04:17:50 PM »what kind of drink would you be?whore never mind someone already did that joke 39350
Serious / Re: Russell Brand drops his anti-voting stance and urges people to vote Green« on: May 03, 2015, 03:52:24 PM »It's safe to say capitalism works the best when you are taking human nature into account.part of me wants to believe that we're not all just selfish pieces of shit deep down, though we're very capable of transcending our nature 39351
Serious / Re: Russell Brand drops his anti-voting stance and urges people to vote Green« on: May 03, 2015, 03:40:04 PM »
i don't know anything about venezuela
39352
Serious / Re: Russell Brand drops his anti-voting stance and urges people to vote Green« on: May 03, 2015, 02:31:37 PM »So Verbatim, if capitalism is so full of "teh evulz", what other system do you propose? Something that wouldn't work in reality, I'd imagine.socialism didn't work in the past =/= can't ever be done correctly 39353
Serious / Re: Russell Brand drops his anti-voting stance and urges people to vote Green« on: May 03, 2015, 02:28:29 PM »At least give me time to respond.i'm not blaming you, i'm just saying, it's sort of silly to pretend as though i've been "REKT" when the one question that i'm asking hasn't yet been adequately answered and by "adequately answered", i mean i should be a capitalist by the end of this conversation I'm not sure how to elaborate further.exactly, right i mean, i'm not gonna sit here and tell you that i know how it would work, either, but one's own inability to understand something does not necessitate any sort of argument against it "You can't price things meritoriously; it doesn't even make sense. " maybe to you and i but to say that it can't be done because a couple of teenagers are unable to grasp it is simply myopic this is something i've discussed with aria before, but it was only under the token that all the world's commodities and resources are infinite so, if you work for a week, you earn a week's worth of food--i think that's pretty simple, and i fail to see how that kind of system wouldn't work even with finite resources the informational deficits you speak of diminish when you take animal products out of the equation if anyone has allergies to any of the food provided, there would be alternatives what informational deficits are there Quote The economy operates on productivity, not merit.productivity is inherently meritorious but only if it's, you know, actually productive--you have to use that word carefully and precisely saving cancer patients is productive; making a new ipad with 1 or 2 new redundant features is not no matter how many drooling idiots want that ipad, it's never gonna be worth it saving sick people is worth it 99.99% of the time Quote Depends on the model you're using; but put simply it's a growth in our ability to convert inputs to outputs.that was a rhetorical question; i know precisely what productivity growth is and i was saying that it's kind of oxymoron, in the way that we define our productivity because the new iPad really isn't that much different from the previous model maybe it's a little bit lighter, i don't know and people will spend hundreds of dollars on them by the tens of millions Quote What makes you the arbiter of "worth" in this situation? If you don't like a product, you're free to not buy it and to persuade others why they shouldn't buy it.of course, but you see, that's missing the point it's not that i'm the arbiter of value--i just don't think you're going to be able to argue that a cancer patient is worth less than your iPad you cannot believe in an objective morality if you don't have an objective system of values, can you Quote But it's exactly this system of free consumer demand which means we aren't living off the land with no time for philosophy, literature, art or anything else of higher value than a new iPad.perhaps, but now we don't have to live off the land anymore we've built civilization, and the only reason it would collapse if capitalism were to end is because people are greedy, selfish, petty cunts Quote (part of the evil of capitalism is that it's self-sustaining, like a cancer)Except it isn't; capitalism will end itself eventually. Capitalism is unsustainable in the very long run precisely for the reason that it's too innovative. Quote Which is a monopoly. Which is very rarely a function of capitalism.which is just the thing monopolies aren't inherently bad--they're only bad once they start abusing their position a polypoly (or whatever you'd call it) is WORSE, in my opinion, because we start wasting resources on redundant products--this video game console thing is a good example does there really need to be three consoles on the market why don't we just have one console and improve upon that model oh, it's because people are greedy cunts... that's right Quote Yeah, and I think they're all retarded. But, again, you're misapplying something as being a function of capitalism; people are loyal about all manner of things from sports to skin colour. It's a fairly common cognitive bias, regardless of whatever economic system you have set up.so why exploit it further i don't think i said this, in particular, was a function of capitalism--merely that those are the type of people that capitalism breeds which is a fact we breed mindless consumers who "pick sides" Quote Which is a function of protectionism, which absolutely isn't a function of capitalism. I agree that people who go on about 'muh domestic industry' don't know what they're talking about.fair enough Quote Knowledge and information is becoming ever more important in the modern economy; it's not surprising that younger people are therefore somewhat disadvantaged.>somewhat disadvantaged a little bit glib, coming from someone who hasn't quite made it to that point yet but i guess it's better than saying we're not disadvantaged Quote There's no moral principle which dictates people must have a home.i look at it as compensation for being born i didn't ask to be here, meta--i'm only here because a couple of fucknuts thought it would be a good idea and it's been the same for all one hundred billion of us i think we're entitled to some form of compensation in the form of a comfortable life and yeah, having a home is one of the must-haves call it a "trailer park", i don't give a shit, it's the same idea Quote It's a broken system because people don't like what you like?No, what I like has nothing to do with it. I like video games, but I'm still able to make the basic concession that it would be better to donate to a good cause than it would be to waste money on a game. All capitalism does is make us spoiled brats with mixed priorities. Just because you see the stupidities of brand loyalty doesn't change the fact that there's millions of brand loyalists, and they wouldn't be brand loyalists if there was no such thing as a "brand" to begin with. Quote I'm not claiming the outcomes are always as efficient as possibleIt should be, though. That's my argument. If your system isn't always as efficient as possible, it's a broken system. That's the very definition of brokenness. If something is inefficient, it's broken. Quote I'm saying the system of pricing and resource allocation is more efficient than any other system you could name.But not one that I could imagine. Hell, it's why I support policies like the EITC which subsidise low wages. Quote It does. It's why the capitalist systems in the world are the most innovative, it's why capitalism has been the most productive system in human history. Competition works.I don't think anyone said it didn't work. It just doesn't work well. Or, well enough, I should say. It's inefficient. Socialism, from all that I've read about it, just seems so much better in theory. And by the way, I fail to see how giving everyone the right to a comfortable home (without mortgage, of course) isn't socialism, or at least, an example of it in practice. 39354
The Flood / Re: How was your night FAGGOT BITCH CUCK SHIT (Prom Edition)« on: May 03, 2015, 09:45:22 AM »So cleverSo mad. 39355
The Flood / Re: How was your night FAGGOT BITCH CUCK SHIT (Prom Edition)« on: May 03, 2015, 09:43:13 AM »STFU don't copy me, try to be original for onceSTFU don't copy me, try to be original for once 39356
Serious / Re: Russell Brand drops his anti-voting stance and urges people to vote Green« on: May 03, 2015, 09:40:22 AM »
lolk
39357
Serious / Re: Russell Brand drops his anti-voting stance and urges people to vote Green« on: May 03, 2015, 09:37:53 AM »"he didnt even reply to my last post"except it wasn't you said i got "wrecked" which implies not only that he "won", but he "WRECKED" me one basic, easily rebutted response does not constitute getting "wrecked" sorry 39358
The Flood / Re: Movies you can never watch because a minor detail ruins it for you« on: May 03, 2015, 09:35:43 AM »why is the wilhelm scream a thing? why does it appear everywhere?apparently there's a six minute video on its history <_< 39359
Serious / Re: Russell Brand drops his anti-voting stance and urges people to vote Green« on: May 03, 2015, 09:32:33 AM »You really are delusional enough to think that the lack of a reply means you winis that what i said? No 39360
The Flood / Re: How was your night FAGGOT BITCH CUCK SHIT (Prom Edition)« on: May 03, 2015, 09:25:04 AM »Nice Tool poster.METAL |