Messages

101

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-15 18:13:24 »

Repeating the same thing over and over again

All of the points you are saying that we haven't addressed have actually been addressed many times, so I doubt there's any point in us trying to address them again.

See, I was right!

the feelings mutual. ok i'll address them right now. if you feel i've disregarded anything you said it's probably because i thought they were purely opinion based (Karl Marx too idealistic, Karl Marx claims he knows everything, general disapproval of Marx, democracy looks better than communism, your story about firefighters), inaccurate (idea = execution [thomas edison took 1000 tries to build the lightbulb, guess the lightbulb was a dumb idea then], Zimbabwe not being a democracy, Mugabe being a socialist), argument ad hominem (calling me ignorant, calling me stubborn, dyed-in-the-wool), lack of seriousness (trollface, your story), and what i felt to be lack of content (too much opinion, analogies that could work either way). if you are to convince me that socialism is a bad idea, i don't need analogies to ancient civilizations, personal attacks, stories, or your opinion on Karl Marx. Just name flaws like not being able to possess private property. The reason you are finding it hard to get your point across, is because trying to prove a whole system is a bad idea is because you have to prove it true in every single situation, every variation and incarnation of socialism that can exist. because if even one succeeds or doesn't suck then there is a form of acceptable socialism. you have to find traits that all socialist societies would have not specific ones like communism. it's even harder since we are talking about the idea of socialism and not the execution meaning that all you have to talk about is really the rights/equality/freedom aspect of it. Of human rights you mentioned relatively little. You mentioned slavery which is not necessary in socialism.

"The idea behind me killing her was that it would improve my life. Free of all the ways she inconvenienced me, I would have greater personal opportunities. I could be happier."
Clearly there is nothing wrong with the idea of killing her.


Scatt, the king of Reducto Ad Absurdum, out.

i'm sorry but sacrificing some rights for a general higher quality of life is wrong? Not absurd at all. there are many schools of thought to socialism (i'm guessing you have an image of socialism as evil slavemasters ingrained into your brain); you can't exactly say how much rights are taken away. You could have full-blown communism, or a democratic society where everyone has complete power over their fate and pulls in an equal amount of money. Like I said, a democratic socialist republic (yes i said republic), would hardly infringe on any rights. Perhaps just as much as the Patriot Act. Or anti-abortionism. Or not being allowed to commit suicide. It depends what form socialism takes. Is it Absurd? No. Imagine every single poor or homeless person without a job given an opportunity (whether they take it is another story) to suddenly start making $80k a year. Imagine those wealthy investors who contribute nothing to the world like Warren Buffet (third richest man) making the same amount. The top .01% of (1/10000) makes 23% of the total income. That means that on average they control 2,300 times more money than the average man but do they do 2,300 times the work? do they contribute 2300 times as much? Corporate mega-moguls would also make the same amount of money, say $80k a year. The poor and underprivileged would gladly accept socialism (hence why communism is dominant in poorer nations). If you know anything about maslows hierarchy of needs, people look for employment, food, shelter, safety, sex, breathing, water etc etc. before they seek the higher ideals such as freedom.

Obviously, you and me, who have our physiological needs satisfied, who have health, property, safety, shelter, food, family, friends, a significant other, who have sex, love, self-esteem, self-confidence, companionship, and most of all opportunity, who have so much more than the bottom feeders, are free to pursue higher ideals at the top of the pyramid. That's why people such as you, such as me, would not accept socialism. We're at the top or near the top, free to pursue higher thought without worrying about the rent or a saber tooth tiger. I'd say we live a sheltered life. But people at the bottom seek to pay their rent, they seek food, they seek shelter, and socialism satisfies that. Safety takes priority over ideals for 95% of humanity. In this day and age, our safety comes from the economy.

Cliffs:

Many schools of thought to socialism. Amount of rights taken away varies. Can be very limited to totalitarianism. Socialism + Democracy for example could ensure rights.

Some rights given up for safety is not absurd

maslow hierarchy of need says ideals/rights do not matter until baser needs are satisfied (namely employment, food, shelter, survival)

Poor people would gladly sacrifice some of their ideals for safety.

You and Me are well off, hence we have a different mindset. You and me, do not worry about safety/shelter/employment because we have needs satisfied. Hence you see it as a bad trade, while less fortunate people are more likely to embrace socialism (China, Vietnam, etc)

ALSO ALSO SCOTTMCTONY, i think this should interest you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

102

Completely Unrelated / Re: jeffdamann Spamming or Creating Excessive Amounts of Threads?

« on: 2010-06-15 02:22:38 »

forget it, have a feeling you're not gonna listen to what i say.

103

Completely Unrelated / Re: jeffdamann Spamming or Creating Excessive Amounts of Threads?

« on: 2010-06-15 02:19:52 »

jeffdamann:
22 days registered
45 topics started
287 posts posted
Total time spent online: 2 days, 6 hours and 56 minutes

Me:
35 days registered
21 topics started
330 posts posted
Total time spent online: 5 days, 5 hours and 34 minutes

jesus, i don't know why you care so much about the guy. 2 or 3 or even 5 threads a day isn't that bad. i don't think he's trying to spam or troll. i think you need to relax, he actually seems a bit too excited about qhimm. i don't know the guy too well or at all, but serious, isn't this kinda small to get mad over? if you got a real reason to be mad, PM him. No need to start sh*t in public ya know?

104

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-14 21:31:11 »

And I do understand what kudistos is saying, but she's telling me

>she

I've got some bad news for you

Also, what ScottMcTony said about you making a concentrated effort to fail to comprehend anything someone who disagrees with you is saying is actually true. Let's take your claim that I'm separating the idea from the execution when it comes to socialism or communism or whatever: I've explained a million times that the horrific failures in execution imply a flaw in the idea itself, as well as actually noting other problems with the idea, but you continue to claim that I haven't.

It's pretty obvious that you're either trolling or you're so dyed-in-the-wool that socialism is a religion to you, since you are failing to even recognise the criticisms we are making, let alone refute to them. I can make a post wherein I address problems with the idea of socialism and you apparently don't even see it, since you'll claim, right after I wrote the post, that I didn't say the things I said. I know I said them; I typed the post minutes beforehand, so don't tell me that I didn't say what I know I said. All of the points you are saying that we haven't addressed have actually been addressed many times, so I doubt there's any point in us trying to address them again.

i've explained many times, that execution is separated from an idea. socialism is a theory, and people change it to their wishes. if i build a red house, Lenin can build a blue house based off my plans, he would execute it wrong, but the idea would remain the same. Execution =/= idea. Especially since I said it originally, and I think I know what I meant when I said the idea behind communism is a good one. I didn't mean execution. And not only that, you're making your argument on a technicality?

socialism has many shapes and forms. that can be executed differently. Lenin might make a blue house, Stalkin could build a red house, Trotsky could make his pink for all I care. They are versions of Socialism. Sure Russian Communism failed doesn't mean all Socialism will fail. Socialism can be approached in different ways. In fact there's even democratic socialism. I doubt there would be too much infringement on ones rights with democratic socialism.

i do read them (your responses). but you're attacking communism, the execution of socialism, etc etc. Socialism is an economic system. And the idea behind it is just sharing and equality. Or forced sharing as Scott McTony says.

I can also say you guys are closeminded, dyed in the wool, mindless followers of the herd, for disagreeing with me (same sh*t really).... attack the logic not the person.

When did this thread get dumber than a newgrounds thread on religion?
Stop being dumb everyone, especially ScottMcTony you gad dam.
Also OutFoxxed you're starting to come off like someone who makes a concentrated effort to fail to comprehend anything someone who disagrees with you is saying.

There's a difference between communism and socialism. There's a difference between the idea and the actual outcome. Socialism is basically a world where everyone shares everything

No, socialism is a world where everyone is forced to share everything, and understands that this will be the case should they create anything. What you're suggesting is a hypothetical species that would naturally behave like a Utopian socialist society even in a circumstance of anarchy. And hey, maybe such a hypothetical species would be pretty functional, I certainly don't think these things, I will call them Ogloobs, are terrible evil creatures. But that is hardly the idea behind socialism.

The idea behind socialism is a world where everyone is equal and shares. that's the concept behind it. While in actual practice you are forced to share, you have communism, you have lower quality products, etc etc. And honestly? Is there anything wrong with everyone having the same amount of wealth? That is the idea behind socialism. Everyone has the same amount of money. I don't know how you are going to tell me it's a bad thing, and tell me i'm being ignorant or stubborn. I just don't think any of your arguments are good enough to convince me that socialism is as evil as you guys say it is.

I guess you are entitled to your opinion. It really depends; are you willing to trade away some of your rights for equality and a better of standard of living (in theory....) or perhaps you believe that human rights are the penultimate possession one can own. The truth is, arguing for socialism and against socialism is like arguing on whether GW Bush was right for taking away our right to privacy for increased security. You can disagree, but I don't see how you can tell me I'm wrong (especially since this is an opinion). It really comes down to this, equality (perhaps not executed as well as it could be) or liberty? Two golden ideals, can you really say which is better than the other? You can say which one you prefer, but not which is better.

Also, to be honest, I would not want to be socialist. I have no problem with it, it's interesting to me, but as an aspiring doctor I would be an idiot to refuse a capitalistic society which would benefit me so much. I'm just trying to get you to understand my actual preferences. For example, I am an atheist, I think religious is stupid, but I have no reason to condemn it. I would not go for socialism either. But I have no reason to hate it (communism is another story). I like to keep an open-mind.

105

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-14 18:56:39 »

When did this thread get dumber than a newgrounds thread on religion?
Stop being dumb everyone, especially ScottMcTony you gad dam.
Also OutFoxxed you're starting to come off like someone who makes a concentrated effort to fail to comprehend anything someone who disagrees with you is saying.

There's a difference between communism and socialism. There's a difference between the idea and the actual outcome. Socialism is basically a world where everyone shares everything (so i don't understand how it's evil). Try and keep an open mind and understand what I'm saying, . because the idea behind communism is marxism where people collectively own the industries. It's a good idea (unless you have a problem with sharing). And I do understand what kudistos is saying, but she's telling me flaws in the execution of communism, which is irrelevant to my point. does it matter that communism turned out to be evil? no. does it matter that it failed? no. you know why? cause there is a difference between theory (socialism) and the actual execution (communism). if you noticed i talked about marxism and socialism, even specifically using those words instead of communism. socialism is an economic system not a political system(like communism). I'm being ignorant because people were talking about something irrelevant? perhaps you don't understand that socialism does not entail slavery or mass murder. If you had said socialism is a bad idea b/c of the lower quality products due to a lack of competition, I might've agreed. but what purpose does "communism enslaves people" do when talking about socialism? socialism is an economic system where the population owns the industrial aspects of the country. so why talk about how communism is evil? saying the sky is blue has just as much relevance. you can be socialist and democratic. political system =/= economic system. socialism =/= communism.
please do your research before being an idiot......

i've even made an effort to make sure people understood i was talking about socialism and marxism. i tried not to say communism and if you read my posts they aren't talking about socialism.


difference between socialism and communism:
http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-socialism-and-communism.htm

in fact if you read the first posts in this thread, they talk about economic regulation. i was not talking about communism at all. when i said the idea behind communism, i meant socialism.

and why are you referring to yourself in the third person?

106

General Discussion / Re: Making fun in FF7 through mods

« on: 2010-06-14 17:53:41 »

anyone want any of my famous barbequed chocobo?

hook me up brah

107

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-14 17:47:58 »

>implying Zimbabwe is a democracy

>implying Mugabe isn't a hardcore socialist (hey, I've found an example of socialism in practice that isn't Leninist, and guess what? It's sh*t!)

>implying that relative poverty is no different from absolute poverty

>implying those "poverty stricken" Americans aren't rich by global standards

>comparing relative poverty to the holocaust

I rest my case :]












EDIT: I never meant communism or totalitarianism. Socialism is more of an economic system than a form of government to be honest. So often people confuse Marxism with the hardcore totalitarianism that defined the 20th century. People think Socialism ---> Stalin mass murder + infringed on basic freedoms. Socialism doesn't require that. Sure we've seen communism fail but one failure and the failure of its clones does not mean an economic system automatically sucks. Though I doubt socialism will be given a chance, considering what's happened.

108

Completely Unrelated / Re: THE OFFICIAL WORLD CUP AND CAPS LOCK THREAD!

« on: 2010-06-14 17:19:54 »

i'm not trying to troll. i laughed at these pics, and my brit friends laughed at em too =P. making fun of people is a form of joking around (sometimes, other times we just hate you) for guys. it's friendly and not meant to troll. if i were trying to make you mad/troll you i would probably just act extremely ignorant. like saying USA wins 1-1 :]  

damn why isn't canada in the world cup =/

109

Completely Unrelated / Re: Have I been harsh as of late?

« on: 2010-06-14 17:14:29 »

your lucky i don't know what snarky means.

tbh i don't really notice anything bad about your replies. if anything they could be a bit more alpha.

110

Completely Unrelated / Re: Cat Mario, and other evil games

« on: 2010-06-14 17:09:18 »

there is a shortcut in stage 1-2 where you can skip to like stage 6-1 lol

111

Completely Unrelated / Re: THE OFFICIAL WORLD CUP AND CAPS LOCK THREAD!

« on: 2010-06-13 21:37:05 »

i got like 10 of these pics =P

112

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-13 20:11:38 »

first things first, try separating the idea from the execution. i'm merely saying the idea was not a bad one, not that communism is good or turned out alright.

This really is hilarious. The main point I tend to make is that communism suffers when the idea gets executed. And that is the problem with with idea. Or one of the problems. Communism and all other "big ideas" fail to take into account that things don't always go to plan and fails to take into account that one can not judge a system as good or bad or know whether it will be successful or unsuccessful until it has been put into practice. The idea is wildly over-ambitious and based on a gross simplification of human society and a childish insistence that everything be perfect. Not accounting for the separation between idea and execution is a flaw in the idea

Well, if you read my original posts, i said the idea behind communism is a good one. and on the contrary, i can claim a childish ignorance and stubbornness (insistent belief that communism is bad; negative connotation; propaganda?) because without actually experiencing the political system you know just as little. Also your knock on Marx is that he has a grand scheme for the world that he assumes automatically works because he thinks he is some sort of genius. But unless you know an equal amount or more, can you say that Marxism is a bad idea. Sure he might not know everything, but you would have to have a sufficient amount of understanding to claim a political system doesn't work just as much as he would need the understanding to claim a political system does work. Russian Communism is a tainted form of Marxism. I'm pretty sure the point of socialism was that everyone owned everything, not the government owning everything.

And no it's not. Execution and Idea are two different concepts. My idea might be to build a house. Red brick 5 bedroom and 3 bath. Now if some idiot were to copy my plans (Lenin) and build his own house, but instead build marble 5 bed 3 bath, my idea is still the same idea (red brick 5 bed 3 bath), Lenin just didn't do it the way it was planned. Now if I was to follow through with my idea (hypothetically), I can still build my original red brick house. As planned. Good ideas can have bad execution and still be good ideas. You are trying to use a technicality or something.

My point --> Socialism was badly executed the FIRST time. and each and every other version of socialism is based off Russian communism. They are just different faces of the same monster. In an isolated country, country X, socialism could hypothetically be executed quite well.

Also as to Marx not having a clue about the world, and sitting in his arm chair and all that. I say look at democracy. Look at the primarily white aristocratic males who run society. I think they are equally limited in scope, not understanding poverty the way an orphan in the slums of New York or the ghettos of Louisiana. How does a rich white man understand what may be going through the youth populations mind? Or perhaps a poverty stricken girl who lost her parents? I think that is an unfair knock on socialism. Does it matter who, where and how the idea was conceived but whether it is a good one or not?

Yes, look at democracy. It isn't perfect is it? Now look at communism. Democracy suddenly seems a lot better when the two are compared. You see, this is related to the idea of far left philosophies being unrealistic and over-ambitious. They think that we can make a perfect society with no injustice, and whenever there is any injustice created by a system they say that the system must be destroyed. But what if there is no perfect system? What if we have to compromise and go with the one that creates the least injustice?

I don't really know how many times i'd have to say this, but idea =/= execution. socialism looks bad because the only version of socialism you've seen are incarnations of Russian communism. I already agree that communism is bad. You're trying to compare 1 example that turned out badly, to Euro-American democracies. Imagine if the only version of democracy you had was that of Zimbabwe. Hyperinflation, viciousness, terrorism, violence, corruption, AIDS, refugees. You name it, they have it. You are limited in view to what you've seen. Communism is the Zimbabwe of Socialism. It wasn't meant to turn out like that. You are automatically assuming every version of Socialism is bad because you've seen a couple. It doesn't work like that. My ex had purple highlights in her blonde hair. If I were to look at her, could I assume that everyone had purple hair? You are myopic in your view until you've had a lot more experience than you have. Who are you to sit in your armchair and claim you know everything about history, by saying Marxism is a bad idea? Russian Communism = Bad. A fair representation of Socialism I've yet to see.

also, i don't think you can judge an entire political ideology by one or two examples especially since communist russia pretty much created modern day communism and are essentially just one example of communism.

When was I just using one example? Look at China, North Korea, Vietnam, Burma, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Cuba and god knows how many other countries in which communism has lead to poverty and oppression and has totally failed in its goal, in most cases either being overthrown or silently dismantled. Has there ever been any communist state that has been even moderately successful? Capitalism hasn't always produced thriving, prosperous meritocratic democracies, but it has at least succeeded a few times.

They're all incarnations of Russian Communism. Once the world saw Russian Communism the truth is, it influenced them and pulled them away from traditionalist Marxist philosophy. There's a reason socialism is differentiated from Communism.

I'm in a storytelling mood right now, so I'll tell you a story.

There was once a burning building full of people, and two firemen arrived to try to rescue everyone. One of the firemen was a capitalist/classical liberal/democrat/whatever philosophy I'm supposed to be defending, and the other was a socialist/communist/I don't care any more. However, it soon became apparent that rescuing everyone would be impossible.

The first fireman said:

"We can't save everyone; some people will have to die. But we can save some! Let's go in there and save as many as we can, even if it means some injustices will result!"

The second firemen said:

"No! Equality is what's most important! It's not fair that some people get to live and some people have to die. Why should some people get life whilst others lose out? Unless everyone can be saved, no-one should be saved! Everyone must die!"

Then a giant tentacle monster came and raped both of them. Then it raped the charred corpses of everyone inside. The end. (if you couldn't tell, it's 3:00 where I live and I'm tired )

[/quote]

Jeez, I'll use a real-life example (especially since anyone can write pointlessly while supporting their beliefs, mein kampf anyone?). 12% of the population in the US live below the poverty line. Idk if this is the most recent statistic, or if it's even correct. But 12% of 300million people is 36million people, 6 times that of the Holocaust. 80% of Liberia is in poverty. Zimbabwe is up there as well. I'm going to say that you completely ignore those millions and millions of people dying from AIDS, or hunger while commenting that socialism is evil. Both systems have their drawbacks, but I doubt poverty or hunger would exist in a legitimate version of socialism since everyone has an equal share of everything (and not like idiot stalin where they starve everyone to death). I feel like I'm attacking democracy too much, but it's because i'm trying to take democracy of its throne of gold. It's a good idea, but doesn't mean that every idea compared to democracy is automatically bad. these are two unique systems and as you've seen with communism it also has its drawbacks. I've yet to see a fair representation, and when and if we do, we'll see how Socialism actually plays out.



Try and look past Russian Communism's failure. There is a difference between Russian Communism and its incarnations (Cuba, China, whatever) and Socialism the way Marx envisioned it. I don't believe in Communism just as much as you don't believe in it. Just keep an open-mind. It's better to look at the world and see what could be, than to see what it isn't.

EDIT: Also the ultimate irony is, Lenins Communist party gained control of Russia through a democratic process.

113

General Discussion / Re: Square-Enix Mangas

« on: 2010-06-13 16:03:11 »

im sorry guys. i think i took a how weeaboo are you quiz once. i got 0%.

114

Completely Unrelated / Re: THE OFFICIAL WORLD CUP AND CAPS LOCK THREAD!

« on: 2010-06-13 15:59:09 »

soccer does suck but it's your duty as a canadian/american to gloat and rub it in englands face

115

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-13 01:23:28 »

Actually, the idea behind communism is a bad one.

It's naive about human nature in a very childish way (which is one of the reasons why people become more right wing as they get older), and it's also incredibly arrogant. Why arrogant? Because Marx seems to have assumed that, not only had he understood the course of history to the extent where he could predict the future, but also that a working political system can be derived a priori. Oh for f***'s sake! I can't even begin to explain how ridiculous that is. Humans and society are far too complex for anyone to be able to look at a few factory workers and then figure out a way to fix society whilst sitting in one's armchair. It's not at all surprising that when the ideals of communism are put into practice they always go horribly wrong and create states so far from the actual ideal that commies can get away with saying that they weren't following the ideals at all. It should really be obvious that any grand, over-ambitious theory of everything that is derived a priori is going to fail badly.

first things first, try separating the idea from the execution. i'm merely saying the idea was not a bad one, not that communism is good or turned out alright.

i don't think society is that complicated. everyone in the world wants one thing: happiness/satisfaction. that is what everything, our actions, our lives, our governments, iare structured to accomplish, and every action is in the pursuit of happiness or will bring the most happiness/satisfaction or is a gamble at happiness. Even suicide, where one willing harms themself is based on the belief that by ending the pain you are at the happiest position you can be in. Understanding that, by creating a world of equal opportunity where noone is better than someone else, and everyone was truly truly equal (in theory), then everyone in theory should have access to the same amount of happiness. There isn't the corporate moguls in their ivory towers and the dirty bums found in the subways. Of course Marxism is good on paper. I don't know how you can say Marxism is about slavery, it is actually about the proletariat SEIZING control. Communism is a version of marxism, that I am willing to bet, is not what Karl Marx or anyone would have imagined. The ideas behind it, were pretty much this 1) Everyone has equal opportunity and access to material things 2) Equality between social classes. By being as equal as possible, you are giving everyone the same chance to equality. Though, as long as there are differences between people, there can never, ever, be equality. Marxist philosophies when put to practice have been tainted by corruption, brutality and a general totalitarian regime. The slavery is not really part of the idea behind communism, or socialism. The idea behind communism is equality between the social classes. Slavery is just a by-product of the plan in motion. The gulags, the totalitarianism, and everything. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that socialism could work in the modern day world. too many corrupt people, and i doubt the world is ready for a socialist/totalitarian government.

Also as to Marx not having a clue about the world, and sitting in his arm chair and all that. I say look at democracy. Look at the primarily white aristocratic males who run society. I think they are equally limited in scope, not understanding poverty the way an orphan in the slums of New York or the ghettos of Louisiana. How does a rich white man understand what may be going through the youth populations mind? Or perhaps a poverty stricken girl who lost her parents? I think that is an unfair knock on socialism. Does it matter who, where and how the idea was conceived but whether it is a good one or not?

The idea behind socialism is this: equal social classes. equal wealth. the economy is the property of the people. is that so bad of an idea? when you get down to execution of socialist ideals slavery, death, evil blah blah blah, that's when the problems arise. But the idea itself is quite good. (this is to scott mctony as well. the slave state is how communism is executed not the idea behind it as was the point of my post)

also, i don't think you can judge an entire political ideology by one or two examples especially since communist russia pretty much created modern day communism and are essentially just one example of communism. if you look at vatican city, you may say a theocracy works quite well. if you look at other theocracies, you would see the Aztecs and human sacrifice or maybe variations of theocracies such as the monarchies in which the kings ruled through divine right. Yet Vatican city a peaceful nation is doing just fine.

116

Completely Unrelated / Re: Math test that can determine which film is your favourite film ever!!

« on: 2010-06-13 00:11:06 »

I got 6.  Not my favorite movie ever, but definitely up there.  Pretty cool.

which number did you pick to end up with private ryan?

1.7

lol good one =P you got me.

Protip: everyone gets 9. The "math test" is an algorithm that always gives you a multiple of 9, and multiples of 9 below 121 always add up to 9.

Look closely:

Taking away 1, multiplying by 3 and then adding three is the same as multiplying by 3; the 3 that gets added at the end makes up for the 1 that gets subtracted at the start and multiplied by 3. Multiplying the result of this by 3 is the same as multiplying by 9. It would actually be less obvious if the "subtract 1" step were left out, since one would still always end up with two digits that added up to 9 without the two digits making the number that is 9 x whatever you started with). Unless one picked 10. Then it would f*** everything up.

i would pm you to remove this but there is exactly 0% chance that anyone will bother reading this and attempt to understand =P

I got 6.  Not my favorite movie ever, but definitely up there.  Pretty cool.

which number did you pick to end up with private ryan?

1.7

I didn't pick 1.7 because I'm using an ATI card

umm what?

117

Completely Unrelated / Re: Math test that can determine which film is your favourite film ever!!

« on: 2010-06-12 21:14:06 »

I got 6.  Not my favorite movie ever, but definitely up there.  Pretty cool.

which number did you pick to end up with private ryan?

118

Completely Unrelated / Re: The Official World Cup Thread

« on: 2010-06-12 20:48:13 »

american football is extremely intense. similar to HIIT. you might not think it's much but you're going all out, compared to soccer where you just go at 50% most of the game. If you did give it your all you would tire out in a matter of seconds, which is why american football has those rest periods. Iunno if you've wrestled before, but those 90 seconds of wrestling may seem short, but damn, the intensity of it. Once you've wrestled, everything else in life is easy.

Soccer is more a long distance cardio stamina slow-twitch muscle thing. Football is fast-twitch intense all out sport with rest breaks in between.

I think you guys deserved to win =P We had a lucky goal at the end, plus americans don't even care about soccer. Noone watches soccer here. Our favourite sports
Football >> Basketball >> Baseball >> hockey >> Mixed Martial Arts (srs lol)
soccer doesn't break the top 5 here =/

119

Completely Unrelated / Re: The Official World Cup Thread

« on: 2010-06-12 20:30:37 »

lol you brits cant even beat us at your own sport :] let's see you play us in real football.

120

Completely Unrelated / Math test that can determine which film is your favourite film ever!!

« on: 2010-06-12 20:25:00 »

This math test can predict your all-time most-watched film. (it works)

Mine was Star Wars (it's TRUE!!!)

Try it without looking at the answers.

It's easy and really works:

Pick a number from 1 - 10.

Subtract 1.

Multiply by 3.

Add 3.

Multiply that by 3.

Add the digits together.

Use that number to find your all time favorite movie in the list below.

Your number is:









1. Gone With the Wind.

2. Aliens.

3. Dances with Wolves.

4. Star Wars.

5. Forrest Gump.

6. Saving Private Ryan.

7. Jaws.

8. Doctor Zhivago.

9. The Joy of Anal Sex with Male Goats & Leather Clad Gay Boys.

10. Mary Poppins.

121

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-12 19:03:42 »

I will say to OutFoxxed, who I admittedly only read one sentence of one post from, that I can criticize the ideal behind communism very reasonably and very concisely: I hate slavery, and I especially hate it when every single citizen is a slave to a small number of people, something that is absolutely necessary for communism. If human nature were such that it weren't necessary, communism would be redundant anyway because people would already be behaving the way communism hopes to get them to behave in an anarchistic society.

idea behind communism. in actual practice communism is disgusting. but the idea behind communism where everyone is equal and shares is not a bad one. just that communism is responsible for mass murder and many other things. per

122

General Discussion / Re: Making fun in FF7 through mods

« on: 2010-06-12 17:21:37 »

chocobo is good source of lean meat. i'm sorry but im craving some fried chocobo atm

123

General Discussion / Re: A nice fat wad...

« on: 2010-06-11 19:23:50 »

can you get ducky boxers in this game?

124

Completely Unrelated / Re: your languages

« on: 2010-06-11 19:18:20 »

i know like 0 languages. i'm good at body language though :]. i wink too much irl. and lots of faces too.

125

Completely Unrelated / Re: Your political views!

« on: 2010-06-11 19:16:51 »

that's interesting jeff. makes me wonder, especially since science has evolved to the point where natural selection hardly does anything.