Author Topic: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet  (Read 84958 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10190
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1140 on: February 10, 2018, 03:19:37 pm »
Fuck Thrawn.

Offline Askold

  • Definitely not hiding a dark secret.
  • Global Moderator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7972
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1141 on: February 11, 2018, 03:47:26 am »
In the old canon Thrawn enslaved nations (like the Noghri) used torture, mass murder, terror and subterfuge to reach his goals.

He supposedly just wanted to unite the galaxy to be able to fight the Juuzhan Vong but you'd think that just saying "Dudes! There's these alien warmonger horde and it's coming right for us! We gotta fight together!" (or some more eloquent way to phrase that) would have also been effective AND it would not have caused millions of deaths in a unnecessary war that simply made the galaxy weaker.

...But that's just me and I don't know what the current canon on him is because Season 2 of the Rebels is still unavailable on Netflix...
No matter what happens, no matter what my last words may end up being, I want everyone to claim that they were:
"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."
Aww, you guys rock. :)  I feel the love... and the pitchforks and torches.  Tingly!

Offline Askold

  • Definitely not hiding a dark secret.
  • Global Moderator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7972
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1142 on: February 14, 2018, 06:08:24 am »


...I have no words.
No matter what happens, no matter what my last words may end up being, I want everyone to claim that they were:
"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."
Aww, you guys rock. :)  I feel the love... and the pitchforks and torches.  Tingly!

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7740
  • Gender: Male
  • The Mad Dog of Shimano
    • My Twitter
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1143 on: February 14, 2018, 09:20:58 am »
These folks do know that "Hitler did nothing wrong" is just a meme, right?  Like Tide Pods and Ugandan Knuckles?
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline Art Vandelay

  • Greatest Person to Ever Grace this Shitty Forum
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9485
  • Gender: Male
  • Check Your Privilege
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1144 on: February 14, 2018, 09:37:37 am »
I guess you could say that they do not kno de wey.

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7740
  • Gender: Male
  • The Mad Dog of Shimano
    • My Twitter
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1145 on: February 14, 2018, 12:43:29 pm »
clickclickclick
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline Lana Reverse

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
  • Gender: Female
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1146 on: February 14, 2018, 04:16:39 pm »
In the old canon Thrawn enslaved nations (like the Noghri) used torture, mass murder, terror and subterfuge to reach his goals.

He supposedly just wanted to unite the galaxy to be able to fight the Juuzhan Vong but you'd think that just saying "Dudes! There's these alien warmonger horde and it's coming right for us! We gotta fight together!" (or some more eloquent way to phrase that) would have also been effective AND it would not have caused millions of deaths in a unnecessary war that simply made the galaxy weaker.

...But that's just me and I don't know what the current canon on him is because Season 2 of the Rebels is still unavailable on Netflix...

Well, in the new continuity, Thrawn's pretty ruthless. I don't want to go into spoiler territory, but I'll just say that somebody willing to throw their own subordinates under the bus to further their own plans isn't exactly what you'd call a nice guy.



...I have no words.

There's a fine line between understanding that Hitler wasn't "all evil, all the time" and whitewashing him. It's a line these comments are sailing right over. A few cute photos don't make him less of a depraved monster.
Beware those who hate the rich more than they love the poor.

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4739
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1147 on: February 14, 2018, 06:19:59 pm »
http://www.ibtimes.com/nra-promotes-buying-gun-valentines-day-2653598



Posted before the school shooting in Florida, taken down after.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4739
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1148 on: February 15, 2018, 04:39:13 pm »
Commentary on US gun laws after the school shooting in Florida that has left at least 17 dead:

Quote
Quote
I'm still having trouble getting my head round the idea that the shooter wasn't old enough to buy booze, but was old enough to own an assault weapon.

On that point, we allow people to serve their country when they're 18. Seems like allowing them to own a gun, generally speaking, isn't that big of a leap.

Put another way, if there's a reason to prevent them from having their gun, it shouldn't be JUST because of their age.

Quote
Quote
The sheer fact that you can buy a gun at a younger age than alcohol is insane.

Besides, it is a great leap.
In the military, people are trained, supervised and if necessary, disciplined when they screw up.

They don't stack up guns like other people stack diapers, when in the military. A soldier has one assault rifle and one hand gun, normally. Ammunition is handed to the soldier for certain purposes, they can't garner it sky high in their rooms.

That is a huge difference.
In civilian life, any moron of a hillbilly can buy guns until his house is filled with them and stack up ammunition like crazy. No supervision, no discipline, no training.

You take a shot at 'hillbillies' as 'morons' but I'd be willing to bet that the people you're referring to are more knowledge about gun use and applicable gun laws than the people committing these crimes. Also, there's legit reasons to have guns in some parts of this country where people (and help) are farther away and wild animals can pose a real threat to safety.

Here's a question for the European/Australian crowd who likes to tell us Americans what terrible people we are: Have you ever met/talked with/directly engaged anyone that falls into the group that you think so little of, or is it just an internet stereotype for you?

PS: I think the drinking age is fine where it is, but I'd be in favor of an exception for service members specifically because you don't get to serve without being able to have some discipline in your life. The fact that an Army Private can get blown up by a Taliban IED in Afghanistan but can't order a Bud Light when he finishes his tour rubs me the wrong way. That Private has earned it, IMO (subject to the same laws everyone else is subject to - ie drunk driving, etc.)

On the bit about animals (admittedly from a German):

Quote
That's your argument? Protection from wild animals?
There's a reason why they call them assault rifles. I've never heard of these protection rifles you speak of.
Please explain to me why you need a semi-automatic of full-automatic rifle to defend yourself from a bear.

Reply?

Quote
Well first off, those are two different things. Generally speaking, fully automatic weapons are illegal.

As to semi-autos, what's wrong with those? Put in the context we're talking about, given the closing speed of a bear and the stopping power required to take it down, do you really want to trust that a) you'll hit your first shot with a bolt action rifle and b) that you'll get a kill shot the first time, or at least a wounding shot that gives you enough time to re-cock? That MIGHT be the case, but a semi-auto gives you more margin of error --> higher chance of surviving.

And it's not just bears. Mountain lions and other large cats are a thing to.

Then there's pack animals. If you have a pack of coyotes going after your livestock, you'll need to eliminate that threat as quickly as possible, as each animal you lose is taking money out of your pocket.

So it's not as cut and dried as you'd like to think.

And the real crazy post:

Quote
Quote
Ok then let me ask you this, imagine a general gun ban is issued in the US. Do you think the number of people who will fall victim to leathal animal attacks will be over or under the number of people who currently get shot in the streets?

That strikes me as the wrong question.

We already have laws against shooting people in the streets. Enacting such a ban wouldn't add to the criminality of homicide.

At the same time, you'd be actively taking away people's ability to protect themselves, their families and their investments, creating new victims that didn't exist before solely because of government action.

Is that the position you intended to advance?

Cue everyone telling him how much of an utter fucking moron he is:

Quote
Just one word: WOW!

Quote
To elaborate: when you make it harder for people to get guns in the first place, you're going to have fewer gun crimes being committed.

Quote
Thanks for putting my astonishment into words.

Quote
Another note:

The big thing I think you're missing here is that restricting (note: restricting, not banning) gun ownership will not mean that you will have these additional gun deaths on top of whatever's already going on, it means that the latter number will decrease, and very likely drastically so. Are there people who will end up dead because of a lack of guns? Probably. But that number will almost certainly be far outweighed by the number of people who will be alive because of that same lack of guns.

It's essentially the same rhetorical trick often used by opponents of single-payer in the US when proponents cite the cost as being $32 trillion over ten years while the cost of the current system is $49 trillion over those same ten years. They pretend that single-payer would cost $32 trillion over and above the $49 trillion already being spent, rather than being honest, which is that it will cost $32 trillion instead of $49 trillion. ("Can't afford to do single-payer? No, we can't afford not to do single-payer... plus we'd have a better system overall.") That's essentially the trick being pulled here, pretending that the deaths attributable to a lack of guns (of which there will no doubt be some) will be added on top of all the deaths already happening, which is simply not the case.

This trick is deceitful, it's dishonest, it doesn't work on anyone paying attention, and I thought you were better than that, Another note:

The big thing I think you're missing here, Armus, is that restricting (note: restricting, not banning) gun ownership will not mean that you will have these additional gun deaths on top of whatever's already going on, it means that the latter number will decrease, and very likely drastically so. Are there people who will end up dead because of a lack of guns? Probably. But that number will almost certainly be far outweighed by the number of people who will be alive because of that same lack of guns.

It's essentially the same rhetorical trick often used by opponents of single-payer in the US when proponents cite the cost as being $32 trillion over ten years while the cost of the current system is $49 trillion over those same ten years. They pretend that single-payer would cost $32 trillion over and above the $49 trillion already being spent, rather than being honest, which is that it will cost $32 trillion instead of $49 trillion. ("Can't afford to do single-payer? No, we can't afford not to do single-payer... plus we'd have a better system overall.") That's essentially the trick being pulled here, pretending that the deaths attributable to a lack of guns (of which there will no doubt be some) will be added on top of all the deaths already happening, which is simply not the case.

This trick is deceitful, it's dishonest, it doesn't work on anyone paying attention, and I thought you were better than that.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline Lana Reverse

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
  • Gender: Female
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1149 on: February 19, 2018, 07:28:12 pm »


Then what do you call the Chinese occupation of Tibet?
Beware those who hate the rich more than they love the poor.

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4739
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1150 on: February 19, 2018, 07:41:22 pm »
Or Japan's expansionism in the first few decades of the 20th century.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10190
  • Gender: Male
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1151 on: February 19, 2018, 08:31:01 pm »
Western Imperialism duh.

Offline Lana Reverse

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
  • Gender: Female
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1152 on: February 22, 2018, 10:55:05 pm »


This guy's like a serial killer in the making.
Beware those who hate the rich more than they love the poor.

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7740
  • Gender: Male
  • The Mad Dog of Shimano
    • My Twitter
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1153 on: February 23, 2018, 09:06:46 am »
Before they even mentioned incels, I knew it was from one of those incel sites.  I may, or may not, have spent far too much time on the mainpage.
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline Art Vandelay

  • Greatest Person to Ever Grace this Shitty Forum
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9485
  • Gender: Male
  • Check Your Privilege
Re: Not-Good Things People Say on the Internet
« Reply #1154 on: February 23, 2018, 10:33:19 am »
Maybe, just maybe, this kind of shit is why nobody wants you in the first place.