Should we declare War on North Korea?
0
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
Jesus, this is still going.I have a ache of the frontal lobes. I been in the darkroom since 10.
Stop drinking then.
I haven't.
then a bullet should fix it.
0
animefreak_usa
Child of Samael
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
Jesus, this is still going.I have a ache of the frontal lobes. I been in the darkroom since 10.
Stop drinking then.
I haven't.
then a bullet should fix it.
The haji's tried that. My shoulder stiil hurt on rainy days.
0
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
Jesus, this is still going.I have a ache of the frontal lobes. I been in the darkroom since 10.
Stop drinking then.
I haven't.
then a bullet should fix it.
The haji's tried that. My shoulder stiil hurt on rainy days.
eat weed brownies
0
animefreak_usa
Child of Samael
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
Jesus, this is still going.I have a ache of the frontal lobes. I been in the darkroom since 10.
Stop drinking then.
I haven't.
then a bullet should fix it.
The haji's tried that. My shoulder stiil hurt on rainy days.
eat weed brownies
Smoke a blunt or use hash oil.
0
Tanasinn
The Bellpepper
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
animefreak_usa wrote...
say what! wrote...
Jesus, this is still going.I have a ache of the frontal lobes. I been in the darkroom since 10.
Stop drinking then.
I haven't.
then a bullet should fix it.
The haji's tried that. My shoulder stiil hurt on rainy days.
eat weed brownies
Smoke a blunt or use hash oil.
the trick for really good brownies is to make the 'weed butter' with the hash oil, then melt it, spray the pan with it then produce the brownies per whatever recipe you use.
Golden every time.
0
Tanasinn wrote...
No, no. Your non-researched facts and the fact that you claim things and never produce proof for them are two different things. You see, conversation can have many points applied to them at the same time. But I do apologize for stating the obvious in light of... well whatever the hell you are doing.
We're still waiting for that which I haven't "proven", you couldn't possibly mean the PM right? Good god, you're incredibly persistent for something irrelevant.
And we're still waiting for that which I supposedly "didn't research". That's alright, I'm a patient man I'll continue to wait :D.
Tanasinn wrote...
Ok, so you just admitted that it isn't important for the general good of the site to keep unruly members in check every once and awhile. If you claim to hold your 'proper value' then why did you get upset when your thread [which has not even reached the requirement standard of SD quality] got moved to IB? You reaction was one of someone who lets others run their life. Someone who held value wouldn't have cared about the move and they would have just tried again well knowing that the move was simply just a lesson in creating threads that actually made the SD standard.A: Uh, no. What I said was in the grand scheme, they themselves aren't important.
In the scheme of the site, they certainly are important to the community and as such I've discussed respectfully with Tegumi and even Jacob as it regarded personal account problems.
But they are not the end-all, be-all. Again, if something were to happen then I'll find something else to occupy my time.
B: I asked you and didn't get an answer, maybe if I bold it you might feel compelled to answer. What is this standard for Serious Discussion that my post lacked?
I won't reply to another post until you actually manage to answer that question. Or perhaps, is it that you can't answer?(I know you can't because the thread
itself was legitimate)
Tanasinn wrote...
Actually you are wrong yet again. You see, if that thread was suppose to be in IB it would [and this might be a bit intense for you so I will lay it down smoothly] have been moved to IB. Simple as that, there is a reason that you are not a mod. The name of the member should not matter here. They presented the topic a very solid one at that, and the conversation grew from there. The topic to your thread isn't solid at all. Actually the question presented is very one-sided. No one wants to go into war with anyone. We still have our hands in places I feel we overstayed our welcome. Adding yet another war on things isn't going to help and bringing other countries into a conflict based solely on north korea's empty threats won't look good on anyone. It will simply paint everyone's view of america in a negative light despite being the lesser of two evils.
How can a question be "One-sided"? In other words, it would be a question with only one logical answer. Or a question asked in a manner in which forced a person to agree. Do you even comprehend your own statements?
The only thing one-sided about the post was my position. I had announced my beliefs, and I had asked others to do the same. In no way did I compromise the debate or the discussion. And if you bother to read, you'll see that my position started to lighten up, even just a bit to the idea of diplomacy.
Bringing 'other countries into the conflict'? Since the Armistice was signed, not a peace treaty. South Korea technically has been at war with the North since 1953.
And with the North's abduction of Japanese civilians, Japan is very much involved. As well as the domestic threat posed by long range North Korean missiles.
Yes, there are contingencies in the Middle East, and I'd rather not a two-front. But we were threatened with Nuclear Weapons. And to quote Chuck Hagel, I'd rather not be the first one wrong.
The longer we wait to deal with North Korea, the less of an opportunity we will have to actually avert a longer, more costly war.
If we are to be diplomatic, hopefully we can get meaningful concessions for peace.
Tanasinn wrote...
No, the truth is IN the eye of the beholder. Please, if you are going to use saying like that at least learn to use them in full and not some butchered version you thought up to be 'clever'. However I will say that you are right in stating that this applies to you completely as well. No one is exempt as much as you sadly wish you were.Yes, I missed but one word. Anything you can get, eh my friend? And that one word didn't butcher the meaning or anything at all. The meaning is to say that truth is irrelevant, the truth is merely the accepted 'reality' of a mass of people. Or even the accepted reality of individuals.
In this case, we both believe the other to be incompetent. You believe that by virtue of the action of forum superiors, that it deems you correct. But what you seemingly cannot (or probably are refusing to) comprehend is the fact that the initial thread itself was not moved here.
Indeed, it took about 10 pages to do so. Coinciding mostly with Jacob's annoying spam. To be sure, a detraction on economic debate on my part helped out. But I believe that was minor compared to the meaningless spat between me and Jacob.
Tanasinn wrote...
See 'Trolling'. They wanted you to see it and then bitch about it later. And in your statement here, they should mark this as a success in their book. As for the errors, I pointed out that you incorrectly used a saying by missing a word. You see, saying take different meanings when you start warping things to fit your excuse of a defense. It is the same as removing the [,]s in the sentence below:
Lustful Angel helped his uncle jack off a horse.
Do you see how bad this looks on you compared to the correct sentence?:
Lustful Angel helped his uncle, Jack, off a horse.
There are quite a few other mistakes [too many to bother really] but in a act of kindness I will point out the other error[s] I saw in this post in blue just for you Lustful. The easy part is that these small things come up constantly which, I admit, is part of the reason why I didn't link to any of them in the first place. I mean why bother when they are a post or two ago right?
Warping things to my excuse of a defense? I've only seen Jacob engage in such acts. Name one time I falsified information towards you. I've stated time and time again that I've been factual in my debate, and it is you who has proven incapable of proving otherwise.
For the record, we shall observe your 'proof' of my errors. I am a betting man that it is you, who has stretched the definition of 'error' and has engaged in falsehood..
Tanasinn wrote...
Actually we do have evidence. If you have forgotten [which I pray on your 'high intelligence' that you didn't] your thread is now in IB. Which means someone higher than you thought it did not meet the requirements to stay in SD and the thread has yet to move back there. If that explanation went over your head it means that someone was questioning your 'intelligence', moved the thread to another board to let other people see what that mod saw in your posts which resulted in quite a few negative responses towards you and your thread. If you didn't hold this relevant in any way whatsoever then why, may I ask, did you feel the need to become upset about this?
Glad you asked, here's the answer: I wasn't "upset", I was "annoyed" because as I've stated time and again: Until Jacob(and a few others with a post here and there) started to detract said thread the conversation was perfectly serious, free flowing and I'm sure I had engaged my opponents just as they engaged my thinking.
Also, it was yet another assumption on your part that I was 'upset' but I'll let that go this time out of the same 'kindness'.
In addition, your gross over-simplification of the situation doesn't deem it correct. Yes, it's true that the moderators moved it here. No, it wasn't on the account of my intelligence or on the account of the intelligence of the topic.
But specifically the derailment of said topic.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/derailed
Tanasinn wrote...
It's not 'screen shooting', it's 'screen-capping'. A few may argue that 'screen-shooting' [note the '-'] may work, but it is generally one of the 'grey' words. It just sounds bad when you say it out loud.Also it's not the only thing I was right on but eh, the general population of both SD and IB already know this so at this point it will be redundant to repeat it.
In your second point here, let's refer back to your 'eye of the beholder' comment earlier. This applies to you as well [as you stated earlier] in your shallow mind, you assume you 'gained' a victory due to your 'high intelligence'. What I just said here is no different than what you claim in this statement.
So now you're nitpicking semantics?(The difference between the words 'capping' and 'shooting'). But because we're on an internet forum, with at least a decent understanding of computer functions and the verbiage, and the fact that we're not 'saying' anything but rather typing leaves it a mute point.
In much the same way, though one can stretch and call a forum a 'community' and there is a 'population' of users. But the general populace neither knows or cares, most of them are looking at doujins or many more frequent the other parts of the forum(community).
If I were to be a heartless bastard, I'd say that I don't believe in a 'cyberworld'. This is no different from a phone, except in written form instead of direct conversation. But either way, this is a non point on your part.
You're also mistaken in assuming that I believed that I would gain a victory. Perhaps, in some small fashion I hold out the slightest hope that you would at least acknowledge the differences between us. But I no longer hold such hopes.
If you believe me to be delusional, I believe you to be as delusional. The difference is, understanding that we share this belief to an extent means there's no point in trying to 'win' this debate(a pointless debate if there ever was one)
Tanasinn wrote...
But yet you spend the time addressing anyway. Anyone in their right mind wouldn't waste the time. Well unless they are trying to be 'holier than thou' in their poor attempts to prove that they are smarter than everyone else. But truly falling to this level pretty much kills any claims in being intelligent at all. However, your view in doing your actions can be applied yet again to anyone else here. Even you. The only way for you to get better at making good SD threads is to have one of your threads [as well as you] be picked apart and then presented to you so you can see and acknowledge your weaknesses. For example, your 'better than you' approach to everything.. on the internet.. I'll let that one sink right in there for a bit. As we both believe the other to be delusional in our thoughts about ourselves, any rebuttal at this point is meaningless. As a perfect example, you state that trying to prove my intelligence kills my claims of being intelligent at all.
So, when a person pleas not guilty to a crime, by attempting to prove their innocence they are establishing their guilt? As I said, one of the greater flaws as Tegumi explained it to me, was that this forum was detracted and debased. Both by myself to an extent, but as well as other factors.
I had offered to Tegumi a resolution, that namely I would stay on course and the discussion would be more closely moderated by its participants. I imagine I hadn't heard an answer, quite correctly IMO because this thread has become far more detracted since.
You earlier asked why I cared, well I don't care that much but in everything intellectual that I do, pursue, etc holds in it a piece of my pride. Whenever someone moves something to IB, insults me or even prevents me from speaking out altogether(such as in the economic discussion) I take that very personally.
Who ordained your crowd the know-all of common knowledge? Other than following each other like lambs I mean.
Tanasinn wrote...
So based on your 'eye of the beholder' comment, you don't tolerate yourself.That would technically be true, if I beheld myself to be a dumb person. Which I don't. You do on the other hand, but fortunately for me I've grown to care less about other's opinions.
Tanasinn wrote...
I think you are onto something here. I totally get what you are saying right here. I would like to add that it's usually the dumb people that keep insisting that they are 'smarter and above' everyone else yet they are ready to sink down to the level of a group of posters in a heartbeat. They are completely oblivious to the fact that as the conversation goes on, more and more of their supposed 'high intellect' is just a ruse for hiding the already obvious. They claim that it isn't worth their time and that they are above it all, but once they start throwing insults to make themselves feel better they succumb into being the very thing they lied to everyone about not being. Haha, very funny. I used to be of the opinion of 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me' until I was bullied myself mercilessly throughout my K-12 years. I now know that I have to stand up for myself, even if it means using the same tactics and means. If others question my intelligence, I will rightly question their's.
Especially on the account that if I do as you suggest, and ignore the lot of you. You would all deem your great triumph or proof of Lustful's stupidity.
[quote="Tanasinn"]You do vote, right?
This, by no means is an excuse but the truth of what I've done: I became eligible to vote in 2010. However, the voter registration process was bothersome and I was very unsure of my political feelings, being dissatisfied with both democrats and republicans.
The same was true of the prior election, the Democrats disrespected us all by not even holding a primary(though it's "natural" not too. Even 'democratic America' is a sham) And Mitt Rommney was a miserable candidate.
In fact, the Republicans as a whole have become a miserable organization.
There's also the question of, if I join a political party as a member am I still eligible as a citizen to vote? I'm not sure where or whom to ask that question.
You can take that as a 'point' for my incompetence if you'd like, I don't care at this point.
[quote="Tanasinn"]Did they say that they didn't wish to be descendants? I just don't see you providing anything here to back up your claims. Also did anyone else notice the awkward transition from the tone at the beginning to now? Just me? mmkay.
Let's play a game: I'll tell you a generic statement, and you tell me if you agree with said statement or not:. "America's a melting pot". Most people will
agree with this catastrophic philosophical viewpoint.
But our Founding Fathers grossly disagreed with the supposition
In viewing that we are a melting pot, we've given up all form of identity. As I said earlier, our "identity" is found under the love of 'freedom'. A vague concept, which at its worst can provide legitimization to the worst(or perhaps laziest) of acts.
It's not 'freedom' as a whole that is wrong. But I defined the difference between universal freedom and guided freedom. In short, prudence.
To me, if we maintain only those 'freedoms' we deem most important to us. Rather than freedoms that 'convenience' us(when they really don't and in fact endanger our social structure), then we would have moved closer to the Human Ideal.
Fascism, to me was not only a successful economic model it was also an excellent model for civilization.
Hence, I want to revive Fascism, here in America.
0
623
FAKKU QA
LustfulAngel wrote...
Hence, I want to revive Fascism, here in America.Yeah good luck with that. If you can get any kind of political position that is even remotely important and isn't self-appointed, I will be astounded. Especially if you run with the campaign slogan "Bring back Fascism!" Yeah people will love you just like they do here.
0
Drifter995
Neko//Night
I don't know what's going on here, but it looks like a failed attempt at an sd thread got wrecked, and now the op is mad...
And kona;
And for your info, most of IB regulars can and will show their intelligence and knowledge when needed, it's just..... not all people can comprehend it.
Not saying I'm one of them, I'm here just for da lulz.
>implying every regular in IB is a retard
I think you mean:
>Implying every regular in ib isn't retarded
ahuehuehue
But seriously, we are smart, and will enter an argument, but a) there is never anything worth arguing over, and b) we're fucking lazy
And kona;
Kona-chan wrote...
devsonfire wrote...
Oh god. No wonder this thread got moved to IB.And for your info, most of IB regulars can and will show their intelligence and knowledge when needed, it's just..... not all people can comprehend it.
Not saying I'm one of them, I'm here just for da lulz.
>implying every regular in IB is a retard
I think you mean:
>Implying every regular in ib isn't retarded
ahuehuehue
But seriously, we are smart, and will enter an argument, but a) there is never anything worth arguing over, and b) we're fucking lazy
0
@Lust You can go ahead and try to bring Facism to America, (assuming you're dumb enough to think it isn't happening already), but the moment you want to come and trample on my rights, well, let's just say those that seek to subjugate others will meet more-than-stiff resistance.
Only reason Facism worked in Nazi Germany was because of several reasons; first off, Germany faced economic troubles after being first to not only take responsibility for WWI, but also made to pay for the war, (October of last year, I believe, was when the country was FINALLY able to pay off that debt that the US and Allies imposed on it), and secondly, people were tired of the government that had turned its back on them and wanted a new type of leadership.
Ultimately, Facism would not work in the US, not certainly for economic and social reasons. Though there are signs of it already in play in the US government, we're actually seeing more and more socialism taking over, however painfully slow it is happening.
Only reason Facism worked in Nazi Germany was because of several reasons; first off, Germany faced economic troubles after being first to not only take responsibility for WWI, but also made to pay for the war, (October of last year, I believe, was when the country was FINALLY able to pay off that debt that the US and Allies imposed on it), and secondly, people were tired of the government that had turned its back on them and wanted a new type of leadership.
Ultimately, Facism would not work in the US, not certainly for economic and social reasons. Though there are signs of it already in play in the US government, we're actually seeing more and more socialism taking over, however painfully slow it is happening.
0
Tanasinn
The Bellpepper
LustfulAngel wrote...
[quote="Tanasinn"]No, no. Your non-researched facts and the fact that you claim things and never produce proof for them are two different things. You see, conversation can have many points applied to them at the same time. But I do apologize for stating the obvious in light of... well whatever the hell you are doing.
We're still waiting for that which I haven't "proven", you couldn't possibly mean the PM right? Good god, you're incredibly persistent for something irrelevant.
And we're still waiting for that which I supposedly "didn't research". That's alright, I'm a patient man I'll continue to wait :D.
Tanasinn wrote...
Ok, so you just admitted that it isn't important for the general good of the site to keep unruly members in check every once and awhile. If you claim to hold your 'proper value' then why did you get upset when your thread [which has not even reached the requirement standard of SD quality] got moved to IB? You reaction was one of someone who lets others run their life. Someone who held value wouldn't have cared about the move and they would have just tried again well knowing that the move was simply just a lesson in creating threads that actually made the SD standard.A: Uh, no. What I said was in the grand scheme, they themselves aren't important.
In the scheme of the site, they certainly are important to the community and as such I've discussed respectfully with Tegumi and even Jacob as it regarded personal account problems.
But they are not the end-all, be-all. Again, if something were to happen then I'll find something else to occupy my time.
B: I asked you and didn't get an answer, maybe if I bold it you might feel compelled to answer. What is this standard for Serious Discussion that my post lacked?
I won't reply to another post until you actually manage to answer that question. Or perhaps, is it that you can't answer?(I know you can't because the thread
itself was legitimate)
Tanasinn wrote...
Actually you are wrong yet again. You see, if that thread was suppose to be in IB it would [and this might be a bit intense for you so I will lay it down smoothly] have been moved to IB. Simple as that, there is a reason that you are not a mod. The name of the member should not matter here. They presented the topic a very solid one at that, and the conversation grew from there. The topic to your thread isn't solid at all. Actually the question presented is very one-sided. No one wants to go into war with anyone. We still have our hands in places I feel we overstayed our welcome. Adding yet another war on things isn't going to help and bringing other countries into a conflict based solely on north korea's empty threats won't look good on anyone. It will simply paint everyone's view of america in a negative light despite being the lesser of two evils.
How can a question be "One-sided"? In other words, it would be a question with only one logical answer. Or a question asked in a manner in which forced a person to agree. Do you even comprehend your own statements?
The only thing one-sided about the post was my position. I had announced my beliefs, and I had asked others to do the same. In no way did I compromise the debate or the discussion. And if you bother to read, you'll see that my position started to lighten up, even just a bit to the idea of diplomacy.
Bringing 'other countries into the conflict'? Since the Armistice was signed, not a peace treaty. South Korea technically has been at war with the North since 1953.
And with the North's abduction of Japanese civilians, Japan is very much involved. As well as the domestic threat posed by long range North Korean missiles.
Yes, there are contingencies in the Middle East, and I'd rather not a two-front. But we were threatened with Nuclear Weapons. And to quote Chuck Hagel, I'd rather not be the first one wrong.
The longer we wait to deal with North Korea, the less of an opportunity we will have to actually avert a longer, more costly war.
If we are to be diplomatic, hopefully we can get meaningful concessions for peace.
Tanasinn wrote...
No, the truth is IN the eye of the beholder. Please, if you are going to use saying like that at least learn to use them in full and not some butchered version you thought up to be 'clever'. However I will say that you are right in stating that this applies to you completely as well. No one is exempt as much as you sadly wish you were.Yes, I missed but one word. Anything you can get, eh my friend? And that one word didn't butcher the meaning or anything at all. The meaning is to say that truth is irrelevant, the truth is merely the accepted 'reality' of a mass of people. Or even the accepted reality of individuals.
In this case, we both believe the other to be incompetent. You believe that by virtue of the action of forum superiors, that it deems you correct. But what you seemingly cannot (or probably are refusing to) comprehend is the fact that the initial thread itself was not moved here.
Indeed, it took about 10 pages to do so. Coinciding mostly with Jacob's annoying spam. To be sure, a detraction on economic debate on my part helped out. But I believe that was minor compared to the meaningless spat between me and Jacob.
Tanasinn wrote...
See 'Trolling'. They wanted you to see it and then bitch about it later. And in your statement here, they should mark this as a success in their book. As for the errors, I pointed out that you incorrectly used a saying by missing a word. You see, saying take different meanings when you start warping things to fit your excuse of a defense. It is the same as removing the [,]s in the sentence below:
Lustful Angel helped his uncle jack off a horse.
Do you see how bad this looks on you compared to the correct sentence?:
Lustful Angel helped his uncle, Jack, off a horse.
There are quite a few other mistakes [too many to bother really] but in a act of kindness I will point out the other error[s] I saw in this post in blue just for you Lustful. The easy part is that these small things come up constantly which, I admit, is part of the reason why I didn't link to any of them in the first place. I mean why bother when they are a post or two ago right?
Warping things to my excuse of a defense? I've only seen Jacob engage in such acts. Name one time I falsified information towards you. I've stated time and time again that I've been factual in my debate, and it is you who has proven incapable of proving otherwise.
For the record, we shall observe your 'proof' of my errors. I am a betting man that it is you, who has stretched the definition of 'error' and has engaged in falsehood..
Tanasinn wrote...
Actually we do have evidence. If you have forgotten [which I pray on your 'high intelligence' that you didn't] your thread is now in IB. Which means someone higher than you thought it did not meet the requirements to stay in SD and the thread has yet to move back there. If that explanation went over your head it means that someone was questioning your 'intelligence', moved the thread to another board to let other people see what that mod saw in your posts which resulted in quite a few negative responses towards you and your thread. If you didn't hold this relevant in any way whatsoever then why, may I ask, did you feel the need to become upset about this?
Glad you asked, here's the answer: I wasn't "upset", I was "annoyed" because as I've stated time and again: Until Jacob(and a few others with a post here and there) started to detract said thread the conversation was perfectly serious, free flowing and I'm sure I had engaged my opponents just as they engaged my thinking.
Also, it was yet another assumption on your part that I was 'upset' but I'll let that go this time out of the same 'kindness'.
In addition, your gross over-simplification of the situation doesn't deem it correct. Yes, it's true that the moderators moved it here. No, it wasn't on the account of my intelligence or on the account of the intelligence of the topic.
But specifically the derailment of said topic.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/derailed
Tanasinn wrote...
It's not 'screen shooting', it's 'screen-capping'. A few may argue that 'screen-shooting' [note the '-'] may work, but it is generally one of the 'grey' words. It just sounds bad when you say it out loud.Also it's not the only thing I was right on but eh, the general population of both SD and IB already know this so at this point it will be redundant to repeat it.
In your second point here, let's refer back to your 'eye of the beholder' comment earlier. This applies to you as well [as you stated earlier] in your shallow mind, you assume you 'gained' a victory due to your 'high intelligence'. What I just said here is no different than what you claim in this statement.
So now you're nitpicking semantics?(The difference between the words 'capping' and 'shooting'). But because we're on an internet forum, with at least a decent understanding of computer functions and the verbiage, and the fact that we're not 'saying' anything but rather typing leaves it a mute point.
In much the same way, though one can stretch and call a forum a 'community' and there is a 'population' of users. But the general populace neither knows or cares, most of them are looking at doujins or many more frequent the other parts of the forum(community).
If I were to be a heartless bastard, I'd say that I don't believe in a 'cyberworld'. This is no different from a phone, except in written form instead of direct conversation. But either way, this is a non point on your part.
You're also mistaken in assuming that I believed that I would gain a victory. Perhaps, in some small fashion I hold out the slightest hope that you would at least acknowledge the differences between us. But I no longer hold such hopes.
If you believe me to be delusional, I believe you to be as delusional. The difference is, understanding that we share this belief to an extent means there's no point in trying to 'win' this debate(a pointless debate if there ever was one)
Tanasinn wrote...
But yet you spend the time addressing anyway. Anyone in their right mind wouldn't waste the time. Well unless they are trying to be 'holier than thou' in their poor attempts to prove that they are smarter than everyone else. But truly falling to this level pretty much kills any claims in being intelligent at all. However, your view in doing your actions can be applied yet again to anyone else here. Even you. The only way for you to get better at making good SD threads is to have one of your threads [as well as you] be picked apart and then presented to you so you can see and acknowledge your weaknesses. For example, your 'better than you' approach to everything.. on the internet.. I'll let that one sink right in there for a bit. As we both believe the other to be delusional in our thoughts about ourselves, any rebuttal at this point is meaningless. As a perfect example, you state that trying to prove my intelligence kills my claims of being intelligent at all.
So, when a person pleas not guilty to a crime, by attempting to prove their innocence they are establishing their guilt? As I said, one of the greater flaws as Tegumi explained it to me, was that this forum was detracted and debased. Both by myself to an extent, but as well as other factors.
I had offered to Tegumi a resolution, that namely I would stay on course and the discussion would be more closely moderated by its participants. I imagine I hadn't heard an answer, quite correctly IMO because this thread has become far more detracted since.
You earlier asked why I cared, well I don't care that much but in everything intellectual that I do, pursue, etc holds in it a piece of my pride. Whenever someone moves something to IB, insults me or even prevents me from speaking out altogether(such as in the economic discussion) I take that very personally.
Who ordained your crowd the know-all of common knowledge? Other than following each other like lambs I mean.
Tanasinn wrote...
So based on your 'eye of the beholder' comment, you don't tolerate yourself.That would technically be true, if I beheld myself to be a dumb person. Which I don't. You do on the other hand, but fortunately for me I've grown to care less about other's opinions.
Tanasinn wrote...
I think you are onto something here. I totally get what you are saying right here. I would like to add that it's usually the dumb people that keep insisting that they are 'smarter and above' everyone else yet they are ready to sink down to the level of a group of posters in a heartbeat. They are completely oblivious to the fact that as the conversation goes on, more and more of their supposed 'high intellect' is just a ruse for hiding the already obvious. They claim that it isn't worth their time and that they are above it all, but once they start throwing insults to make themselves feel better they succumb into being the very thing they lied to everyone about not being. Haha, very funny. I used to be of the opinion of 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me' until I was bullied myself mercilessly throughout my K-12 years. I now know that I have to stand up for myself, even if it means using the same tactics and means. If others question my intelligence, I will rightly question their's.
Especially on the account that if I do as you suggest, and ignore the lot of you. You would all deem your great triumph or proof of Lustful's stupidity.
Tanasinn wrote...
You do vote, right?This, by no means is an excuse but the truth of what I've done: I became eligible to vote in 2010. However, the voter registration process was bothersome and I was very unsure of my political feelings, being dissatisfied with both democrats and republicans.
The same was true of the prior election, the Democrats disrespected us all by not even holding a primary(though it's "natural" not too. Even 'democratic America' is a sham) And Mitt Rommney was a miserable candidate.
In fact, the Republicans as a whole have become a miserable organization.
There's also the question of, if I join a political party as a member am I still eligible as a citizen to vote? I'm not sure where or whom to ask that question.
You can take that as a 'point' for my incompetence if you'd like, I don't care at this point.
[quote="Tanasinn"]Did they say that they didn't wish to be descendants? I just don't see you providing anything here to back up your claims. Also did anyone else notice the awkward transition from the tone at the beginning to now? Just me? mmkay.
Let's play a game: I'll tell you a generic statement, and you tell me if you agree with said statement or not:. "America's a melting pot". Most people will
agree with this catastrophic philosophical viewpoint.
But our Founding Fathers grossly disagreed with the supposition
In viewing that we are a melting pot, we've given up all form of identity. As I said earlier, our "identity" is found under the love of 'freedom'. A vague concept, which at its worst can provide legitimization to the worst(or perhaps laziest) of acts.
It's not 'freedom' as a whole that is wrong. But I defined the difference between universal freedom and guided freedom. In short, prudence.
To me, if we maintain only those 'freedoms' we deem most important to us. Rather than freedoms that 'convenience' us(when they really don't and in fact endanger our social structure), then we would have moved closer to the Human Ideal.
Fascism, to me was not only a successful economic model it was also an excellent model for civilization.
Hence, I want to revive Fascism, here in America.
So question, if you don't care, then why do you bother to even post a response?
Also to answer your bold post, please re-read your thread. I figured someone with such 'high intelligence' would've caught that. But I suppose I was wrong.
Another point here, I'm not your friend. You have this weird stalker like vibe about you.
0
LustfulAngel wrote...
[quote="Tanasinn"]No, no. Your non-researched facts and the fact that you claim things and never produce proof for them are two different things. You see, conversation can have many points applied to them at the same time. But I do apologize for stating the obvious in light of... well whatever the hell you are doing.
We're still waiting for that which I haven't "proven", you couldn't possibly mean the PM right? Good god, you're incredibly persistent for something irrelevant.
And we're still waiting for that which I supposedly "didn't research". That's alright, I'm a patient man I'll continue to wait :D.
Tanasinn wrote...
Ok, so you just admitted that it isn't important for the general good of the site to keep unruly members in check every once and awhile. If you claim to hold your 'proper value' then why did you get upset when your thread [which has not even reached the requirement standard of SD quality] got moved to IB? You reaction was one of someone who lets others run their life. Someone who held value wouldn't have cared about the move and they would have just tried again well knowing that the move was simply just a lesson in creating threads that actually made the SD standard.A: Uh, no. What I said was in the grand scheme, they themselves aren't important.
In the scheme of the site, they certainly are important to the community and as such I've discussed respectfully with Tegumi and even Jacob as it regarded personal account problems.
But they are not the end-all, be-all. Again, if something were to happen then I'll find something else to occupy my time.
B: I asked you and didn't get an answer, maybe if I bold it you might feel compelled to answer. What is this standard for Serious Discussion that my post lacked?
I won't reply to another post until you actually manage to answer that question. Or perhaps, is it that you can't answer?(I know you can't because the thread
itself was legitimate)
Tanasinn wrote...
Actually you are wrong yet again. You see, if that thread was suppose to be in IB it would [and this might be a bit intense for you so I will lay it down smoothly] have been moved to IB. Simple as that, there is a reason that you are not a mod. The name of the member should not matter here. They presented the topic a very solid one at that, and the conversation grew from there. The topic to your thread isn't solid at all. Actually the question presented is very one-sided. No one wants to go into war with anyone. We still have our hands in places I feel we overstayed our welcome. Adding yet another war on things isn't going to help and bringing other countries into a conflict based solely on north korea's empty threats won't look good on anyone. It will simply paint everyone's view of america in a negative light despite being the lesser of two evils.
How can a question be "One-sided"? In other words, it would be a question with only one logical answer. Or a question asked in a manner in which forced a person to agree. Do you even comprehend your own statements?
The only thing one-sided about the post was my position. I had announced my beliefs, and I had asked others to do the same. In no way did I compromise the debate or the discussion. And if you bother to read, you'll see that my position started to lighten up, even just a bit to the idea of diplomacy.
Bringing 'other countries into the conflict'? Since the Armistice was signed, not a peace treaty. South Korea technically has been at war with the North since 1953.
And with the North's abduction of Japanese civilians, Japan is very much involved. As well as the domestic threat posed by long range North Korean missiles.
Yes, there are contingencies in the Middle East, and I'd rather not a two-front. But we were threatened with Nuclear Weapons. And to quote Chuck Hagel, I'd rather not be the first one wrong.
The longer we wait to deal with North Korea, the less of an opportunity we will have to actually avert a longer, more costly war.
If we are to be diplomatic, hopefully we can get meaningful concessions for peace.
Tanasinn wrote...
No, the truth is IN the eye of the beholder. Please, if you are going to use saying like that at least learn to use them in full and not some butchered version you thought up to be 'clever'. However I will say that you are right in stating that this applies to you completely as well. No one is exempt as much as you sadly wish you were.Yes, I missed but one word. Anything you can get, eh my friend? And that one word didn't butcher the meaning or anything at all. The meaning is to say that truth is irrelevant, the truth is merely the accepted 'reality' of a mass of people. Or even the accepted reality of individuals.
In this case, we both believe the other to be incompetent. You believe that by virtue of the action of forum superiors, that it deems you correct. But what you seemingly cannot (or probably are refusing to) comprehend is the fact that the initial thread itself was not moved here.
Indeed, it took about 10 pages to do so. Coinciding mostly with Jacob's annoying spam. To be sure, a detraction on economic debate on my part helped out. But I believe that was minor compared to the meaningless spat between me and Jacob.
Tanasinn wrote...
See 'Trolling'. They wanted you to see it and then bitch about it later. And in your statement here, they should mark this as a success in their book. As for the errors, I pointed out that you incorrectly used a saying by missing a word. You see, saying take different meanings when you start warping things to fit your excuse of a defense. It is the same as removing the [,]s in the sentence below:
Lustful Angel helped his uncle jack off a horse.
Do you see how bad this looks on you compared to the correct sentence?:
Lustful Angel helped his uncle, Jack, off a horse.
There are quite a few other mistakes [too many to bother really] but in a act of kindness I will point out the other error[s] I saw in this post in blue just for you Lustful. The easy part is that these small things come up constantly which, I admit, is part of the reason why I didn't link to any of them in the first place. I mean why bother when they are a post or two ago right?
Warping things to my excuse of a defense? I've only seen Jacob engage in such acts. Name one time I falsified information towards you. I've stated time and time again that I've been factual in my debate, and it is you who has proven incapable of proving otherwise.
For the record, we shall observe your 'proof' of my errors. I am a betting man that it is you, who has stretched the definition of 'error' and has engaged in falsehood..
Tanasinn wrote...
Actually we do have evidence. If you have forgotten [which I pray on your 'high intelligence' that you didn't] your thread is now in IB. Which means someone higher than you thought it did not meet the requirements to stay in SD and the thread has yet to move back there. If that explanation went over your head it means that someone was questioning your 'intelligence', moved the thread to another board to let other people see what that mod saw in your posts which resulted in quite a few negative responses towards you and your thread. If you didn't hold this relevant in any way whatsoever then why, may I ask, did you feel the need to become upset about this?
Glad you asked, here's the answer: I wasn't "upset", I was "annoyed" because as I've stated time and again: Until Jacob(and a few others with a post here and there) started to detract said thread the conversation was perfectly serious, free flowing and I'm sure I had engaged my opponents just as they engaged my thinking.
Also, it was yet another assumption on your part that I was 'upset' but I'll let that go this time out of the same 'kindness'.
In addition, your gross over-simplification of the situation doesn't deem it correct. Yes, it's true that the moderators moved it here. No, it wasn't on the account of my intelligence or on the account of the intelligence of the topic.
But specifically the derailment of said topic.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/derailed
Tanasinn wrote...
It's not 'screen shooting', it's 'screen-capping'. A few may argue that 'screen-shooting' [note the '-'] may work, but it is generally one of the 'grey' words. It just sounds bad when you say it out loud.Also it's not the only thing I was right on but eh, the general population of both SD and IB already know this so at this point it will be redundant to repeat it.
In your second point here, let's refer back to your 'eye of the beholder' comment earlier. This applies to you as well [as you stated earlier] in your shallow mind, you assume you 'gained' a victory due to your 'high intelligence'. What I just said here is no different than what you claim in this statement.
So now you're nitpicking semantics?(The difference between the words 'capping' and 'shooting'). But because we're on an internet forum, with at least a decent understanding of computer functions and the verbiage, and the fact that we're not 'saying' anything but rather typing leaves it a mute point.
In much the same way, though one can stretch and call a forum a 'community' and there is a 'population' of users. But the general populace neither knows or cares, most of them are looking at doujins or many more frequent the other parts of the forum(community).
If I were to be a heartless bastard, I'd say that I don't believe in a 'cyberworld'. This is no different from a phone, except in written form instead of direct conversation. But either way, this is a non point on your part.
You're also mistaken in assuming that I believed that I would gain a victory. Perhaps, in some small fashion I hold out the slightest hope that you would at least acknowledge the differences between us. But I no longer hold such hopes.
If you believe me to be delusional, I believe you to be as delusional. The difference is, understanding that we share this belief to an extent means there's no point in trying to 'win' this debate(a pointless debate if there ever was one)
Tanasinn wrote...
But yet you spend the time addressing anyway. Anyone in their right mind wouldn't waste the time. Well unless they are trying to be 'holier than thou' in their poor attempts to prove that they are smarter than everyone else. But truly falling to this level pretty much kills any claims in being intelligent at all. However, your view in doing your actions can be applied yet again to anyone else here. Even you. The only way for you to get better at making good SD threads is to have one of your threads [as well as you] be picked apart and then presented to you so you can see and acknowledge your weaknesses. For example, your 'better than you' approach to everything.. on the internet.. I'll let that one sink right in there for a bit. As we both believe the other to be delusional in our thoughts about ourselves, any rebuttal at this point is meaningless. As a perfect example, you state that trying to prove my intelligence kills my claims of being intelligent at all.
So, when a person pleas not guilty to a crime, by attempting to prove their innocence they are establishing their guilt? As I said, one of the greater flaws as Tegumi explained it to me, was that this forum was detracted and debased. Both by myself to an extent, but as well as other factors.
I had offered to Tegumi a resolution, that namely I would stay on course and the discussion would be more closely moderated by its participants. I imagine I hadn't heard an answer, quite correctly IMO because this thread has become far more detracted since.
You earlier asked why I cared, well I don't care that much but in everything intellectual that I do, pursue, etc holds in it a piece of my pride. Whenever someone moves something to IB, insults me or even prevents me from speaking out altogether(such as in the economic discussion) I take that very personally.
Who ordained your crowd the know-all of common knowledge? Other than following each other like lambs I mean.
Tanasinn wrote...
So based on your 'eye of the beholder' comment, you don't tolerate yourself.That would technically be true, if I beheld myself to be a dumb person. Which I don't. You do on the other hand, but fortunately for me I've grown to care less about other's opinions.
Tanasinn wrote...
I think you are onto something here. I totally get what you are saying right here. I would like to add that it's usually the dumb people that keep insisting that they are 'smarter and above' everyone else yet they are ready to sink down to the level of a group of posters in a heartbeat. They are completely oblivious to the fact that as the conversation goes on, more and more of their supposed 'high intellect' is just a ruse for hiding the already obvious. They claim that it isn't worth their time and that they are above it all, but once they start throwing insults to make themselves feel better they succumb into being the very thing they lied to everyone about not being. Haha, very funny. I used to be of the opinion of 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me' until I was bullied myself mercilessly throughout my K-12 years. I now know that I have to stand up for myself, even if it means using the same tactics and means. If others question my intelligence, I will rightly question their's.
Especially on the account that if I do as you suggest, and ignore the lot of you. You would all deem your great triumph or proof of Lustful's stupidity.
Tanasinn wrote...
You do vote, right?This, by no means is an excuse but the truth of what I've done: I became eligible to vote in 2010. However, the voter registration process was bothersome and I was very unsure of my political feelings, being dissatisfied with both democrats and republicans.
The same was true of the prior election, the Democrats disrespected us all by not even holding a primary(though it's "natural" not too. Even 'democratic America' is a sham) And Mitt Rommney was a miserable candidate.
In fact, the Republicans as a whole have become a miserable organization.
There's also the question of, if I join a political party as a member am I still eligible as a citizen to vote? I'm not sure where or whom to ask that question.
You can take that as a 'point' for my incompetence if you'd like, I don't care at this point.
[quote="Tanasinn"]Did they say that they didn't wish to be descendants? I just don't see you providing anything here to back up your claims. Also did anyone else notice the awkward transition from the tone at the beginning to now? Just me? mmkay.
Let's play a game: I'll tell you a generic statement, and you tell me if you agree with said statement or not:. "America's a melting pot". Most people will
agree with this catastrophic philosophical viewpoint.
But our Founding Fathers grossly disagreed with the supposition
In viewing that we are a melting pot, we've given up all form of identity. As I said earlier, our "identity" is found under the love of 'freedom'. A vague concept, which at its worst can provide legitimization to the worst(or perhaps laziest) of acts.
It's not 'freedom' as a whole that is wrong. But I defined the difference between universal freedom and guided freedom. In short, prudence.
To me, if we maintain only those 'freedoms' we deem most important to us. Rather than freedoms that 'convenience' us(when they really don't and in fact endanger our social structure), then we would have moved closer to the Human Ideal.
Fascism, to me was not only a successful economic model it was also an excellent model for civilization.
Hence, I want to revive Fascism, here in America.
tl;dr
0
Tanasinn
The Bellpepper
Foreground Eclipse wrote...
That. is. one. fucking. long. post.I learned that the more buttfrustrated a user is about their 'intelligence' being laughed at, the longer their post.
I'm just letting him talk now. Not that I read any of it either. Not worth it.
0
Elly wonders if lustfulangel is butthurtful or not.

I told her that lustfulangel is.
Elly laughed together with me at lustfulangel.
I touch elly boobies, she went oh u!
We have fun together with martinis.
Plenty of crying in pain from lustfulangel there was from pure frustration of his thread being moved to IB.
There is also plenty of no fucks given from Me and Elly.

I told her that lustfulangel is.
Elly laughed together with me at lustfulangel.
I touch elly boobies, she went oh u!
We have fun together with martinis.
Plenty of crying in pain from lustfulangel there was from pure frustration of his thread being moved to IB.
There is also plenty of no fucks given from Me and Elly.
0
Tanasinn wrote...
Foreground Eclipse wrote...
That. is. one. fucking. long. post.I learned that the more buttfrustrated a user is about their 'intelligence' being laughed at, the longer their post.
I'm just letting him talk now. Not that I read any of it either. Not worth it.
Anything to make you feel better :) Well, this thread has lost all meaning and purpose. So you guys do whatever the hell you wanna do with it.
0
Tanasinn
The Bellpepper
LustfulAngel wrote...
Tanasinn wrote...
Foreground Eclipse wrote...
That. is. one. fucking. long. post.I learned that the more buttfrustrated a user is about their 'intelligence' being laughed at, the longer their post.
I'm just letting him talk now. Not that I read any of it either. Not worth it.
Anything to make you feel better :) Well, this thread has lost all meaning and purpose. So you guys do whatever the hell you wanna do with it.
Ah another error that needed to be pointed out:
The thread lost all its meaning and purpose at the first post.
there you go. :3