sun_the_second
No bio...
User ID: 2725
I do not believe the LGBT spaces must maintain secrecy. Without the secrecy being inherent, I again do not believe LGBT groups are inherently dangerous.
Ethnicity is a meme. There is never any essential, objective "basis in reality". In that regard, if the Ukrainian nationalists can meme it like the Finns did, they they have it.
If you're going into it with the mindset of "they better not be parasites" then probably don't. Don't expect gratitude or repayment because they never got to agree to that deal.
Also worth considering that if those kids ended up human layabouts, then despite "no traumatic issues" their parents must have done something wrong.
Presumably conspiracy is a crime because planning crimes is also a crime.
I'd presume so, yes, but they're claiming they're a free speech absolutist and that any speech act is just speech. Planning to inflict pain doesn't inflict pain itself.
People like podcasts and audiobooks those days, right? Sunless Skies feels like one of those podcast games.
I'm nearly at the end of beating God of War 2018 on the highest difficulty. I'm not going for 100% completion, but I want to kill all the valkyries.
Overall, a fun experience. The enemies' health does feel bloated until you spend some time vacuuming up resources and sidequests all over the world to upgrade.
So, they'd believe nothing?
What is the mechanism by which you can separate defamatory remarks from genuine ones, which you'd likely want to do in order to retain basic communication ability?
hardcore LGBT ideologue
Not an evil act.
started a social club at his school
Not an evil act.
that could easily be used as a vehicle for grooming
A description that includes so many social groups as to be meaningless, certainly not an evil act by itself. Of course all social clubs of our enemies are creepy weird grooming vehicles and our social clubs are necessary wholesome chungus.
Interesting. What do you do if a resourseful enemy defames you, suck it up? What do you do if a bunch of people openly conspire to kill you? It appears that you cannot legally defend yourself until they act, which they're free to do at the moment they pick.
If you're physically struck but not hurt, have you been assaulted?
Pretty sure you can enable autopilot in Sunless Skies, but maybe it requires you to buy an upgrade first.
Of course you'd then run into the question "if you can create a unit for wusses, thus tacitly admitting there is unsanctioned violence in prison, then a) why is it there? b) why are you isolating only some prisoners?".
Fellas, is it pedophilic for a man to run a Boy Scout camp?
I wouldn't say мужской/женский translates as "manly/womanly". More like those two words are "male/female (adjectives)" and calling someone самец/самка would be "a male/a female (noun)".
And yet, it appears that traditionally men believed what was popular and what men believed was popular. The Overton window within a given society was far more narrow. Men did act differently, according to their ability and social strata.
Bot implies that the personality behind the account is faked and it's being directly used by a malicious agent to spread misinfo, unlike the NPC meme where it's actual people who get "programming updates".
Also, it's been a while since I've seen "woke" used by anyone other than right wingers (as an insult).
but if Russians buy it then we truly are lost.
The dissidents the Western governments target and the dissidents the Russian government targets are usually not the same. So when you are targeted by Russia but not France, it's easy to believe that "sure they do it in the West too but Not Like That".
If you're a non-progressive (pisses off the West) libertarian (pisses off Russia) then sure it's all the same to you.
To elaborate, once you max out the relationship gauge there's an explicit choice to fuck or not to fuck.
You could have said "we gotta stop open leftists from voting" in much fewer words.
My girl friends must be much more autistic than normal, while not all of them would be interested in 1, I can't imagine them discussing 2 seriously.
Did the people in the bus want to shove the guy off? In my country, I think it'd be more likely no one cared about a freerider as long as he didn't get in the way. It would probably even be seen as vaguely snitch-like to care about "the rules" in this case.
It's generally understood that when you do something like be a felon, you've been unfair to society and it can be unfair to you in return. (I'm pretty sure Republicans and Democrats agree that being a felon is unfair to society.) Such as imprison you (which can't legally be done to people who don't belong to the Felons class). I'm not convinced that it's so different to make felons unable to own guns.
why wouldn't Democrats sign a document that voluntarily waives their own Second Amendment rights if it resulted in increased levels of gun control in the country?
Their understanding of "gun control" is not the maximally inconvenient and stupid definition that you've crafted here for them. It's not gun control if all the criminals have one and none of the upstanding citizens do, and it's not gun control either when all the reds are strapped and the blues aren't.
But no, I'm just making the point that 'compromise' requires both sides giving up something
Yes, that's what compromise means. Both sides giving up guns. Or else both sides having guns. One side giving up guns is not compromise when the explicit goal is equitably fewer guns.
The goal of abortion is reducing infanticide and increasing your demographics, which is furthered (arguably even to your benefit, if you care about your demographics and your infants) with a partial abortion ban on you.
The goal of gun control is equitable disarmament (or, maximally uncharitably, to disproportionately disarm your enemies), and partial disarmament goes directly against both.
OBVIOUSLY. This is the fair outcome, where nobody gets a rule imposed on them without consent.
That's not how it works, unless you're willing to amend your modest proposal with "and all other laws that a party didn't vote for doesn't affect them anymore".
A comment on how Trump lies like a used car salesman and other politicians lie like a lawyer caught my eye.
It seems to me that some people, basically, see obvious "used car salesman" lies as insults, personal ones. "You think I'm gonna believe that??? You think that's earning my vote??? The nerve..." So they get incensed. But lawyer lies, on the other hand, they get a nod when they get noticed. "Ok, good one, you even managed to technically say the truth."
There's also some crossover with the way the lies of Soviet regimes are often described. "Everyone knows that they're lying, they know that we know they're lying, yet we can't do anything about it." Now, you don't have to pay lip service to Trump's lies. Yet!!! I imagine that plays into the frustration some people exhibit at Trump's embellishments and what drives them to "fact-check" his every single misdetail smugly.
More options
Context Copy link