Lelouch24 Posts
[color=#2e1a6b]Does anyone know if the Nexus 7 can play 720p h264 .MKV videos? I'm looking for a cheap tablet that I can watch Anime on
Foreground Eclipse wrote...
For one the monetary system would be in shambles[color=#2e1a6b]I would argue that it already is in shambles, although it would probably be hard to achieve a stable currency
two they would not have any allies.
[color=#2e1a6b]I think this is a good thing, we wouldn't have to fight a war for another country.
Unfortunately, this petition really doesn't mean anything, even though we got over 25,000 signatures. It gets to "reach the attention of the President", but nothing more
[color=#2e1a6b]All releases after august 21st are being omitted from the search results.
this, for example, was released on august 21st. You can see it in the search results whether you type in the title, series, or description in the search bar.
But the very next release, mamagoto chapter 3 (released august 22nd), doesn't appear in the search results. You can see it listed in both https://www.fakku.net/newest/page/35 & https://www.fakku.net/series/mamagoto, but you can't see it when you search for it in the search bar: https://www.fakku.net/search/mamagoto
EDIT: The forums search also has the same issue: It won't show any posts after august 21st, and when you search topic titles, it won't show any topic created after August 21st
this, for example, was released on august 21st. You can see it in the search results whether you type in the title, series, or description in the search bar.
But the very next release, mamagoto chapter 3 (released august 22nd), doesn't appear in the search results. You can see it listed in both https://www.fakku.net/newest/page/35 & https://www.fakku.net/series/mamagoto, but you can't see it when you search for it in the search bar: https://www.fakku.net/search/mamagoto
EDIT: The forums search also has the same issue: It won't show any posts after august 21st, and when you search topic titles, it won't show any topic created after August 21st
[color=#2e1a6b]I have no idea whether or not California receives revenue from the porn industry, but this is a really stupid move if they do.
This is similar to a city that outlaws liquor sales; it doesn't protect the people, it just causes them to take their business somewhere else, resulting in a loss of revenue or the creation of a black market
This is similar to a city that outlaws liquor sales; it doesn't protect the people, it just causes them to take their business somewhere else, resulting in a loss of revenue or the creation of a black market
Grenouille88 wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
Grenouille88 wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
[color=#2e1a6b]I went on a 7-day hike at Philmont. Covered 81 miles, went over 5 mountains, and climbed a cumulative total of 20,000 ft... all at an average of 9000 ft altitude.I got most of my backpacking gear from REI, which is kinda expensive, but great quality. I was fine with just a pair of running shoes (hiking boots slow me down). If you're just doing 1-day hikes, all you really need is a camelback.
Just throwing this out there if you haven't heard of it, but REI does what they call a "garage sale" where they sell off their return merchandise for ridiculously low prices. Some of the stuff is damaged but some of it just didn't fit/wasn't what the customer was looking for. Find out when your local REI is having their next one (I think they have two every year) and try to get some really cheap gear.
[color=#2e1a6b]Yeah... my friends informed me of that AFTER I bought all my stuff. They also said that you have to wait overnight, and even then you're lucky to get something good that fits.
I dunno about overnight, per se. I mean, camping out helps (people often rent a tent from REI then camp outside the store with it), but I went to one in Dallas last spring, got there around 3AM or so and got a pair of vibrams and some climbing shoes that fit. You really just have to get there when you can- the earlier the better- and already know what it is that you want to get.
[color=#2e1a6b]My friend got his at the Preston & Park location. He said he waited there all night and was the one of the first persons inside
If I had to re-buy my stuff, I'd probably do the same. But like I said, I already have all the gear I need
Grenouille88 wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
[color=#2e1a6b]I went on a 7-day hike at Philmont. Covered 81 miles, went over 5 mountains, and climbed a cumulative total of 20,000 ft... all at an average of 9000 ft altitude.I got most of my backpacking gear from REI, which is kinda expensive, but great quality. I was fine with just a pair of running shoes (hiking boots slow me down). If you're just doing 1-day hikes, all you really need is a camelback.
Just throwing this out there if you haven't heard of it, but REI does what they call a "garage sale" where they sell off their return merchandise for ridiculously low prices. Some of the stuff is damaged but some of it just didn't fit/wasn't what the customer was looking for. Find out when your local REI is having their next one (I think they have two every year) and try to get some really cheap gear.
[color=#2e1a6b]Yeah... my friends informed me of that AFTER I bought all my stuff. They also said that you have to wait overnight, and even then you're lucky to get something good that fits.
[color=#2e1a6b]I went on a 7-day hike at Philmont. Covered 81 miles, went over 5 mountains, and climbed a cumulative total of 20,000 ft... all at an average of 9000 ft altitude.
I got most of my backpacking gear from REI, which is kinda expensive, but great quality. I was fine with just a pair of running shoes (hiking boots slow me down). If you're just doing 1-day hikes, all you really need is a camelback.
I got most of my backpacking gear from REI, which is kinda expensive, but great quality. I was fine with just a pair of running shoes (hiking boots slow me down). If you're just doing 1-day hikes, all you really need is a camelback.
[color=#2e1a6b]I don't think spamming is that much of an issue. If people don't like it, they'll downvote it until it's hidden.
The main problem with the comments is that many people post unrelated replies to the top comment just so that they're comment is higher on the page. Unfortunately, there's not really a way to fix it without major changes to the reply system
The main problem with the comments is that many people post unrelated replies to the top comment just so that they're comment is higher on the page. Unfortunately, there's not really a way to fix it without major changes to the reply system
Tegumi wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
This luxury would be gone in a Skype discussion, which is why I'm somewhat disinterested in it. Maybe later I'll try it out, but for now I'll pass.the main purpose of this thread is discussion within the thread itself.
[color=#2e1a6b]It sure seems like the main purpose is an invitation to his skype group, but I'll let Biglundi clarify.
At the time, I don't feel like having a huge political debate on 20 different subjects at once, which is why I didn't post my political views. Or is this thread gonna be kinda like that "why I am (not) an atheist" thread?
[color=#2e1a6b]Most of the stuff I discuss here is something I've never discussed before. That's not to say I'm clueless about the topics I discuss, I'm just clueless about what the opposing arguments are. As a result, I usually have to do some research along with each response. This works with a written response debate, since I have as much time as I need to research and think about what I want to say. This luxury would be gone in a Skype discussion, which is why I'm somewhat disinterested in it. Maybe later I'll try it out, but for now I'll pass.
Dfan305 wrote...
and back again! hello everyone =D the heat are off to a great start, although they almost let a lead slip, they still got things done against the celtics. for this nba season, i'm expecting the heat to repeat. the finals match up is most likely going to be lakers v heat... but we'll see. heat haters, continue hating! =D the king got his crown and the monkey officially off his back lol[color=#2e1a6b]I want the Lakers to win, but I honestly think they're overrated. They've got some big names on their team, but I just can't picture them having the sync that Wade and Lebron have.
I don't really hate the heat, just their fans
[color=#2e1a6b]6 turnovers... And we somehow managed to come a fingertip away from winning...
Yep, just a normal Cowboy game
put tebow in already
Yep, just a normal Cowboy game
Anesthetize wrote...
fucking mark sanchez is a piece of shit.put tebow in already
[color=#2e1a6b]I got my Black Belt when I was 12. honestly, I don't think the dojo I trained at was very tough, but my age might have contributed to that
[color=#2e1a6b]I don't own a hard copy of any, but I'm in the middle of reading my first LN, Sword Art Online
[color=#2e1a6b]If it's a detailed post that will create a discussion, it should be fine in the Serious Discussion section. Anything less should be posted in the Random section
fatman wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
We call African countries "3rd world"; is that racist?
No. what does old NATO alliances/developing countries have to do with race?
[color=#2e1a6b]I was gonna ask you the same thing. LA's statement was in the context of talking about the morals of society, which you accused of racism.
If you're going to defend "europeans/americans are a higher class of human" and "Everyone else is descended from trash"
[color=#2e1a6b]BlackJesus brought up the notion that everyone else descended from trash, which LA disagreed with.
[color=#2e1a6b]I'm pro-life, so of course I think aborting because of the gender is stupid. The pro-choice argument is that women have a "right" to choose, and this right is seemingly retained regardless of how stupid the reason is.
[color=#2e1a6b]Not everyone
Jesus fuck Lustfulangel.
I knew you were fucking stupid, but now you're just being a racist asshole.
[color=#2e1a6b]We call African countries "3rd world"; is that racist?
It seems more like everyone else thinks you're stupid
[color=#2e1a6b]Not everyone
fatman wrote...
as Americans we are descendants of Europe, once the highest class of humans on the planet
Jesus fuck Lustfulangel.
I knew you were fucking stupid, but now you're just being a racist asshole.
[color=#2e1a6b]We call African countries "3rd world"; is that racist?
[color=#2e1a6b]I don't see this getting anywhere. I've got lots of schoolwork this week, so this will be my last response here.
Earlier, I said that my plan doesn't involve seceding, but you have repeatedly implied that my plan is secession, and that this is illegal. But, seceding means that we're no longer governed by the law. It doesn't matter whether or not seceding is illegal, because seceding withdraws us from the law. This is like saying "it's against the law to break the law". Now, you could argue that physical force could prevent seceding, which is most certainly true. However, law cannot stop secession, which is what you're claiming
I'm excited too, FPoD is an interesting individual. Anyhow you're a liar, as the rest of my post actually completely refutes your accusation that I "Never cited an act" among other things, you just won't address the Gun Control Act, and the Regulations that were created pursuant to the act. You just...totally ignored that outright. So is this how our relationship is going to be Lelouch? I show that you don't know what you're talking about, and you cut it out of your response, take only parts of my citations to attempt to use it against me dishonestly, and overall provide no substance whatsoever? Because I can do that too.
[color=#2e1a6b]You did the exact same thing when you ignored this:
[color=#2e1a6b]But I'll respond to your gun control act just to make you happy:
The ATF is not an act, it is an organization within the department of Justice. In a later response, you said that by mentioning the ATF, you cited the gun control act. The gun control act of 1968 dealt with restriction on buying and selling guns, basically saying that you can't sell a gun to a felon. This has nothing to do with the claims you're making.
[color=#2e1a6b]I remember the last time an argument transitioned to video format, and that was just 1 person. Now I get to argue in a room filled with those kind of people? oh boy!
[color=#2e1a6b]DipShit
Earlier, I said that my plan doesn't involve seceding, but you have repeatedly implied that my plan is secession, and that this is illegal. But, seceding means that we're no longer governed by the law. It doesn't matter whether or not seceding is illegal, because seceding withdraws us from the law. This is like saying "it's against the law to break the law". Now, you could argue that physical force could prevent seceding, which is most certainly true. However, law cannot stop secession, which is what you're claiming
BigLundi wrote...
I'm excited too, FPoD is an interesting individual. Anyhow you're a liar, as the rest of my post actually completely refutes your accusation that I "Never cited an act" among other things, you just won't address the Gun Control Act, and the Regulations that were created pursuant to the act. You just...totally ignored that outright. So is this how our relationship is going to be Lelouch? I show that you don't know what you're talking about, and you cut it out of your response, take only parts of my citations to attempt to use it against me dishonestly, and overall provide no substance whatsoever? Because I can do that too.
[color=#2e1a6b]You did the exact same thing when you ignored this:
Spoiler:
[color=#2e1a6b]But I'll respond to your gun control act just to make you happy:
The ATF is not an act, it is an organization within the department of Justice. In a later response, you said that by mentioning the ATF, you cited the gun control act. The gun control act of 1968 dealt with restriction on buying and selling guns, basically saying that you can't sell a gun to a felon. This has nothing to do with the claims you're making.
If either you or Lustful have Skype, I have a room FILLED with people who would love to have a chat about politics.
[color=#2e1a6b]I remember the last time an argument transitioned to video format, and that was just 1 person. Now I get to argue in a room filled with those kind of people? oh boy!
DipShit
[color=#2e1a6b]DipShit
BigLundi wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
BigLundi wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
[color=#2e1a6b]anti-american? oh, well, I must have missed the clause that says "but its ok to infringe upon this right if we call you anti-american".
It's called being treasonous. I'm fully within my rights to shoot you on sight if you attempt to secede...as is the government.
[color=#2e1a6b]source?
And my plan never involved Texas succeeding. We'd still be under the constitution.
No, your plan is to say, "WE interpret your rights over us to be this this and this, and if you decide otherwise, we have Texas' resources hostage."
Sorry, but Article III says the only people who are allowed to say what the constitution applies to are the supreme Court. Not...you.
[color=#2e1a6b]Your argument is predicated on the word "only", a word which is not used when describing the supreme court's power.
[color=#2e1a6b]oh... ok. So whenever you decide that an amendment is outdated, the government can just ignore it and arrest us for exercising our rights! I'm so sorry for suggesting that you don't know what you're talking about.
No, when the SUPREME COURT says an amendment, or the constitution means something, THAT'S binding. And as such, they have decided that the federal government is allowed to put insurrections against their authority down. Like your plan.
[color=#2e1a6b]You NEVER quoted a supreme court's ruling on the 2nd amendment. And the ruling you did quote actually goes against what you're saying:
"The phrase has also been interpreted to confirm that state nullification of any federal law,[72] dissolution of the Union,[73] or secession from it,[74] are not contemplated by the Constitution."
Let's be clear here Lelouch. The only people who's opinion matters as to what's sconstitutional and what's not...are the Supreme Court. You want to justify your plan? Give me a supreme court ruling that shows your plan is constitutional. If you can't, you're fucked. Because I already showed the supreme Court says the federal government can stop shit like what you proposed. It's that simple.
[color=#2e1a6b]The only thing you've cited by the supreme court is their interpretation of "a more perfect union". Which as I explained above, shows that the federal government doesn't have the power to stop awesomeness like what I proposed.
But since you're demanding a supreme court ruling, here you go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller#Decision
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.
[color=#2e1a6b](note that "unconnected with service in a militia" is not saying that a connection with the militia voids this right. They said that because past rulings have required that gun owners be connected with militia, which the court doesn't think should be required)
The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.
[color=#2e1a6b]So, militia is a purpose for the right to keep and bare arms. Joining a militia does not limit our right to keep and bear arms
[color=#2e1a6b]You're right, the people are barriers against ambitions such as mine. But if they agree with such a plan, then they aren't barring such ambitions
But they don't agree you silly billy. There's 300 million people in the united states, even more now. You're saying you just need 13 million of them. That's not the people agreeing with you. That's a small group of people trying to fuck over the internal economy by holding Texas' resources at ransom because, "We feel the constitution means THIS!".
[color=#2e1a6b]Most Texans are already pissed at the federal government. I'm not holding them ransom, this plan requires that a majority of texans agree with it.
And the rest of your response was just you ranting about supreme court rulings, which was kinda funny given that the only one you cited contradicts your claims.
EDIT: HELL YEAH! FPoD is BACK ONLINE!
