4doorsmorewhores
No bio...
User ID: 223
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
You think Louis CK is highly highly talented? Go check out his first comeback special after he got cancelled. It fucking sucks. The middle of the set joke sequence starts with a Pascals wager joke about how it would suck to be wrong about god existing, then to "jesus wasnt christian he was jewish how would he feel about the cross?' and then finishing up with 72 virgins. After that it's "I hate being the only person in a small restaurant/store" and then jokes about how words like Retard used to be more socially acceptable. These would all be hack bits in like 2008, but in 2020? You can find most of it on youtube if you want to confirm how bad it is: https://youtube.com/watch?v=q_TZWxihabc
4doorsmorewhores
2mo ago
By your logic
This is usually a thought-terminating phrase and should probably be avoided here. Arguing that because someone thinks X about Y, they might also think A about B, and since you disagree with A and B, they should reject X and Y has several problems.
- There are lots of other confounding variables (In this case London in the 16th century and Polygamy in Portland) that make the comparison meaningless
- We don't know anyone's beliefs of A and B, so framing the discussion is just your opinion
- People don't reflexively have consistent opinions
- The phrase itself connotes a negative stereotype of an annoying twitter or forum arguer.
- It's easy to dismiss your parable example and is therefore unlikely to be productive (Yes, London would've been a population sink if not for factor η)
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
You think it's true that there is a coordinated effort by millions of gay adults and teachers and community-leaders to manipulate children into acting trans and gay and then have sex with them? Obviously "the meme" could refer to a broad range of stuff - but I think that's the gist of it. That seems very outlandish to me. Do you have any evidence?
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
I totally reject the idea that the mods can detect and enforce bad (rules-breaking/bad faith/problematic etc) comments or topics in spite of other commentators engaging with it fruitfully. Dialogue is a two+ way street, if a comment hasn't led to mass rule-breaking or other problems then I don't see how you can pin the good-discourse on other people, and the bad discourse on the OP. That isn't how forums or discussions work. This is terrible.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Obviously very very few people think your school will brainwash your kids into mutilating themselves but you know you can just home-school them right?
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Comparing Fauci to a lawyer that has a fiduciary duty to his client suggests to me that you don't actually understand the responsibilities and law surrounding what the poster you're reply to alluded to. These two roles are nothing alike.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
I have no doubt that a for-profit plastic surgeon has an attempted viral marketing campaign called yeet the teat, but I googled that (in a private tab) and the first result is her saying that gender surgery isn't the same for everybody and some people won't ever need or want it: https://tiktok.com/@gendersurgeon/video/7168239778415103278?is_from_webapp=v1&item_id=7168239778415103278
Is this an example of a coordinated effort by millions of gay adults and teachers and community-leaders to manipulate children into acting trans and gay and then have sex with them or just a questionable surgeon profiteering off a trend?
The rotted tissue hysteria is similarly underwhelming: https://lolcow.farm/snow/res/1703905.html (first google result again)
4doorsmorewhores
10mo ago
Why does a bunch of subreddits going private for a few days prove that it was a good decision?
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
I suppose this is intended to be a catch-all response to the various people here and elsewhere saying that this is actually a demonstration of good healthy democratic-body function. This doesn't concern arguments about a) The inability of a GOP house to take meaningful action with a Dem Senate and President, or b) the belief that a non-functioning House is a positive because the federal government mostly harms and doesn't help.
The issue I take with this viewpoint is that while other parliamentary systems operate in a manner which is more similar to what we're seeing - the norms and practices of the house are actually reflective of the consent and will of the people who participate in it. There was a process to determine the speaker at the Republican Conference (as there is for every congress - sometimes more than once), including negotiating, concessions, a vote etc. This was not smoke and mirrors or shrouded from the public - it is not the system's design that every thought and whisper happens in public, but that votes and procedural action is public. To borrow another parliamentary analogy - this is the equivalent of voting against a confidence motion. It's not reflective of any actual negotiation or democratic participation. The freedom caucus is obviously technically allowed to violate this norm despite being a small minority because the GOP margin is so narrow.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
You went to a Q&A event to ask someone you don't know personally about his newborn son's penis?
4doorsmorewhores
1mo ago
A nuclear warhead isn't a big gun, it's a big bomb. Bombs explode roughly equally in every direction. Bullets travel in a forward line. That's their main distinction.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
He's no doubt the biggest and most successful comedian of the past decade (top 3 at least), I just take issue with the suggestion that only highly highly talented and famous people can evade the wrath of cancellation. In my estimation moderately talented people can fare just fine.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
I don't know who made up the numbers, nor did I post the link, I was responding to someone else's analysis of how the percentiles relate to the data. If you have an issue with the data take it up with Walterodim
4doorsmorewhores
1mo ago
It strikes me as very bad faith to compare a large number of well equipped and trained soldiers having a large advantage if they were to fight a smaller number of armed militiamen to a situation where the existence of large city-destroying bombs nullifies the use of individual arms. It does not contextually demonstrate the value of combined arms or tactics.
4doorsmorewhores
1mo ago
Oh so the government will make gun-style bombs but not bomb-style guns? Figures
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Celebrities are a terrible example because they are not normal people in any sense of the word, the only shared trait they have is that they're well known. This seems to me like a motte and bailey.
Normal jews absolutely are as I described, in fact they're so good at assimilating that society at large can't even decide if they are white or not!
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Well the obvious go-to snarky response would be something along the lines of "If you San Fransisco losers are booing me I must be doing something right." (https://youtube.com/watch?v=UgCK8PnFK_Y) Beyond that the response doesn't really matter, but the fact that he's trying to argue on twitter about the percentage of people cheering for him is just pathetic.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
I don't understand how that can be your genuine belief when the thread after the "rulebreaker" spawned like 6 well-written and detailed responses precisely agreeing with the thrust of the "low effort needing more" comment.
Let me be precise: I believe it seriously erodes the potential quality of discussion when your characterization (wearing the mod hat) of my question is an outlandish strawman yet there are half a dozen other people with high-effort replies saying to the effect "That's mostly true, and here is why its such a problem that lgbt-aligned people are acting that way."
If it's your intention to discourage people from giving viewpoints you disagree with that's fine, just say so. Otherwise it seems that the low-effort comment which I "should've ignored" was expressing a genuine sentiment that lots of people see reflected as true and impactful.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Sure, but an important hinge of this discussion is what 'people' in 'society' are broadly doing. I think all of the posters here practice as minimal sexual engagement/discussion/fondling of children as possible - but when I'm replying to someone who says something broad like 'The memes are turning out to be correct' without being specific as to which ones, I'm required to take a bit of a leap if my comment is to be something other than "Please post some clear sources so that I may engage with what you said." I even flagged this in my first comment here: https://i.imgur.com/AlT6s4m.png
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
I find the moderation hat here putting me in a difficult position since you incorrectly claim I uncharitably characterized it with my question, but 4 other people are replying to my question, "Yes, absolutely that is what influential gay people are doing" albeit sometimes in smaller numbers. It seems I'm not allowed to discuss the non-conspiracy side of this issue earnestly.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Of course "He isn't the sharpest pencil" doesn't mean he's literally a pencil, it's a negation - it's saying he is not.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
These are medical definitions on which our personal opinions have no bearing. Vegetative state means a specific thing - if someone's view is "Biden is too old and dopey to be trusted to be president" then say that.
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Thank you. I was and will continue to do so
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
Obviously. It's a large financial and time commitment as any when it comes to kids (one of the largest time/"lifestyle"/financial changes your life will ever have) but the guy posting above said despite being anti-gun the idea of schools teaching his kids makes him want to go shoot dozens of people to death, if he feels that strongly about it I think it's a good reminder he absolutely has the option to take them out of school.
Analyzing the data you linked, the phenomenon you described is just a result of democrats as a whole being more centrist - so that an 80th percentile most extreme-left Dem is about the same distance from center as a 40th percentile-right GOP. Dems have a single rep with a score of over .7, whereas the GOP has half a dozen people at least .8[You can approach this multiple ways, there are 30 democrats at greater than .500 from center, but 109 republicans]. The specific example of speakers reflects this, Pelosi is at .49 from center, and McCarthy is .454.
More options
Context Copy link