Lurker > StealThisSheen

lolife67 posted...

Yes, I misspoke. I was trying to set he isn't just a stone cold killer.

Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. We don't know.

What we do know is that he is quite literally selling himself and grifting off of the idea that he is a stone cold killer, so I'm not sure he deserves the benefit of the doubt that you seem so determined to give him.

lolife67 posted...

That was literally my first post and what I've been discussing ever since. You'd have to go back and re-read the topic to see why.

You said he "isn't some killer."

He is, quite literally, a killer. By law, by public opinion, no matter what way you slice it.

Shadowblade posted...

Working on it buddy.

Apparently not very hard, if you're here on a Saturday night, criticizing people for... Replying to you on a Saturday night.

Shadowblade posted...

On lamefaqs.com

Lol...

So are you.

Why aren't you out dating your boss or quitting so you can date your boss?

lolife67 posted...

I was talking about the court case.

Why? What's relevant about the court case, when this topic is almost entirely about his character and what he has done since?

lolife67 posted...

Understood. But that's not how court cases are supposed to work.

Who is talking about a court case, here? We're talking about him as a person.

There are plenty of people that the law failed to properly condone, such as OJ Simpson.

lolife67 posted...

Again, I'm speaking about in that moment. He wasn't thinking "I want to kill these people. It'll be totally cool!" Dude was sh***ing himself.

I feel like this doesn't matter. He went there wanting to kill somebody, he did kill somebody, and now he's literally grifting off of the fact that he killed somebody. Nothing else really matters.

bfslick50 posted...

It doesnt make any fucking sense that mutants would be the victims of discrimination.

How doesn't it, when like 95% of mutants are weak as fuck, and have powers like "Squeal when they burp?" Your entire argument is "The powerful mutants COULD be dictators, and thus it's okay to be racist against ALL mutants!"

Get the fuck out of here with that.

Nobody cares

lolife67 posted...

Correct. He didn't look happy he got to shoot someone. He looked scared as hell lol

If I wasn't happy I shot somebody, I wouldn't try to literally market myself based on being "That guy that shot people." But maybe that's just me.

bfslick50 posted...

Sure did. You could write a story where the villain is discriminating against innocent millionaires because of the actions of a few. The villain would be wrong but its still a crappy analogy for real world discrimination. Systemic discrimination always comes with a power imbalance.

The power imbalance is that mutants literally lack the rights of normal people, which means even the weak ones who are no threat to anybody get treated like scum.

I feel like you didn't actually read anything, you just don't want to back down from the point you think you made.

Thor could do more damage to humanity than 99% of mutants, but Thor is pretty much never discriminated against.

thronedfire2 posted...

so why did you make such a big deal about it? do you just argue every chance you get?

No, I was just trying to figure out what point you thought you were making.

Turns out you were just, by your own admission, trolling.

Carry on. I'll make sure to tag you so I don't make the mistake of thinking you're trying to actually contribute, in the future.

thronedfire2 posted...

yes, welcome to CE and/or the internet

"I made a pointless, dumb post, how dare you reply to it" is a weird argument, but okay.

thronedfire2 posted...

I was never trying to argue anything. why are you trying to argue?

You weren't trying to argue anything, so you made an utterly... Pointless post?

Okay, then. Good to know.

I'd say it's more likely you just made a dumb post and it's better to just admit it and move on, but hey, you do you.

thronedfire2 posted...

...saying you need more fiber if it takes you 5+ minutes to shit is a basic biological fact

And it entirely ignores the fact that a child doesn't really get to decide their diet, and thus it's an utterly pointless argument to make. It also ignores a multitude of reasons why it's quite literally not as simple as that. What are you actually trying to argue, even?

Baron_Ox posted...

^ I agree, I'm just posting (what I believe to be) TC's argument.

Oh, right. Fair enough. I wasn't specifically arguing with you, just the concept.

Baron_Ox posted...

I'm assuming that TC meant CA would have a surplus in its budget, for stuff like schools, once weed was legalized

A surplus in the budget wouldn't stop a school from closing for low enrollment, though. It's not closing specifically only due to lack of budget, it's closing due to... Low enrollment, and so they can't justify the budget to begin with. Sure, a higher budget would mean they could keep the school open longer, but it'd still ultimately be a waste of funds, if the enrollment doesn't justify it.

EDIT: Basically, this is the true reason:

sabin017 posted...

The entire education system is dealing with low enrollment because the 2008 recession reduced the birthrate.

boomgetchopped3 posted...

Lack of enrollment seems like a valid reason to close a school right? Unless of course theyre using that as an excuse and just packing 100 kids into a single classroom.

Right, that'd be a concern.

Still has literally nothing to do with legalizing weed, so I'd like to know what TC is on.

Red_XIV posted...

In a universe where literal gods walk the streets of New York every day, the fact that mutants have superpowers doesn't make them that special in their potential for death and destruction.

This is the point. It works as an allegory because, as far as the Marvel universe goes, mutants are no more dangerous than other superpowered non-mutants who walk the street every day. And yet mutants, specifically, are prejudiced against. You can't just apply mutants to IRL standards. In their own universe, there are tons of non-mutants who are just as powerful as they are, yet don't get treated with the same prejudice.

thronedfire2 posted...

in what way did my post defend timing bathroom breaks?

By implying there's a consistent time limit for how long somebody should take to go to the bathroom, via

thronedfire2 posted...

but if it really takes you 5+ minutes to shit you need to change your diet

What's the point of even making that argument, otherwise? There's literally no other way to read this other than "It shouldn't take you longer than that to shit," which feels like an endorsement of timing/limiting bathroom breaks.

ModernPost posted...

The basic standard of self-defense claims. "Stand your ground" and self-defense are not interchangeable terms.

You, specifically, said you think a self-defense claim has merit. So, I ask, again. What in the video makes you think a self-defense claim has merit? The basic standard for self-defense means you are NOT the aggressor. Only "stand your ground" consistently allows you to be the aggressor and still claim self-defense, hence my obvious confusion.

thronedfire2 posted...

but if it really takes you 5+ minutes to shit you need to change your diet

You realize that's easier said than done for a child, right? And that's not even accounting for things like being sick or constipated for whatever reason.

Seems weird to defend literally timing bathroom breaks.

Bloody Roar 4 was the first game in the series Konami had a hand in, and they rushed the development, causing it to be the most lacking and bug-ridden game in the series, and that kinda killed off interest a bit. At that point, it was easy for Konami to just drop it completely.

...Can you make the topic title makes sense, please? The schools appear to be closing due to a lack of enrollment. What does legalizing weed have to do with that?

ModernPost posted...

What I am arguing is not "stand your ground."

What are you arguing, then? Because I can't imagine any other law that allows you to claim self defense when you are the aggressor in the specific instance. Again, what part of the video makes you think a self-defense claim has merit?

UnfairRepresent posted...

Literally no one has said that. You keep strawmanning this nonsense while arguing with people saying other things and claiming it works as an allegory when it doesn't

Multiple people in this topic, such as Aloc, literally have. Hell, you are, by trying to claim it doesn't work as an allegory, specifically because a small amount of dangerous ones exist.

The example posted was people, quite literally, hating ALL mutants. Period. You guys are arguing in support of that, effectively, every time you "Well, listen, it's okay to be afraid of all mutants because..."

Smashingpmkns posted...

Mf "safeguards" mean genocide in the X-Men universe. The humans are always wrong in their efforts to combat the mutants. The humans' entire stance is solely there to make Magneto a sympathetic villain.

This. They literally invented Sentinels to genocide the entire mutant race.

Lock up the bad ones, safeguard against the dangerous ones... But if you support the idea of treating them all differently based on the actions/potential of a few... That's literally racism.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Hell say someone's mutant power was that all living things around her died in agony. By your logic since this isn't her choice, it's wrong to safeguard anyone from her? Because that would be akin to hating gay people somehow?

Wrong to safeguard? No.

Wrong to hate the ENTIRE group because she exists? Yes.

That's the entire point. I'm not sure why this is so hard. People are literally supporting the "No Mutants!" comic villains.

UnfairRepresent posted...

According to these dudes it would be racist if we prevented people from having nuclear warheads in the palm of their hand that within seconds could end life on the planet.

Instead we just have to hope they chose nor to use them and are never manipulated or drugged or misled by anyone else.

But they can't explain how, they can just say horrible things no one said and then say those horrible statements are bad....

It's fucking bizarre. All just because they can't admit that the allegory is off.

Somebody buying a nuke is their choice and their action. You 100% judge somebody based on their choices and actions.

Somebody being born a mutant is NOT a choice, just like being born black or gay.

Why can't you seem to answer that?

UnfairRepresent posted...

Xavier DID act on it.

And to make matters worse, it was because some dude drugged him. So literally anyone could have made Xavier act on it, just like 2 different people did.

That's literally one story, which does not apply throughout the entire timeline. The common theme in X-men is that humans hated mutants BEFORE any of them actually did anything like that. Magneto's entire backstory in most timelines is that he becomes a villain BECAUSE of the prejudice he faced! And, yes, he's a total ass and reacts in the absolute worst way, but people hated mutant kind before he even did anything!

UnfairRepresent posted...

If tomorrow 10% of French people suddenly had the power to destroy all life on Earth within seconds if they chose to, you believe it would be predjudice and racism to react to that in anyway?

If none of them acted on it? Yes, it would be prejudiced to do so! That's the entire point! If you decide to hate an entire group based on what a few of them COULD do, if they didn't actually do it... Yes, that's prejudiced as fuck! If you hate all French people because 10% have the power to destroy earth, and literally none of them have actually done anything... That. Is. Prejudiced. As. Fuck.

LightningThief posted...

Also, I hope you aren't claiming I said bigotry is okay.

In effect, you are, by arguing "It's okay to hate an entire group of people IF Person X ____."

That's the point we're making.

Basically, how does Mutant Girl Y, whose literal only power is having green skin, deserve to be hated, just because some other mutant somewhere COULD hurt people, if they wanted?

This question is important, because like, 90-95% of mutants in the X-men world have negligible powers like that, and yet you're literally arguing it's okay to hate them because Jean Grey can be dangerous if she chooses.

By arguing "It's okay to be prejudiced because Jean Grey exists" is about as close to defending racism as it gets.

LightningThief posted...

They actually have. It doesn't matter if you are gay, trans, Black, white, Latino, Russian, or Australian. All humans are capable of the same thing.

In the case of mutants, it's not an apples to apples comparison to real non fictional marginalized people. Black people are not and cannot be born with the innate ability to conjure a hurricane or melt ourselves into a puddle or whatever random lottery magical abilities.

Mutants are capable of any random lottery magical abilities that can range from harmless to apocalyptic scale.
Humans in the real world no matter your creed are not born with innate magical abilities that can range from harmless to apocalyptic.

What's being confused here is thinking the above means someone is saying bigotry is okay.

Some humans have more access to guns, organized violence, and so on than others, so... Seems like a pretty apt comparison? I fail to see how "This guy has easy access to guns and a network to a group that can cause widespread violence" is any different than "This mutant has a power that can cause widespread violence." It feels like purposely nitpicking the two is... Suspect, to say the least.

Literally all you did is repeat rhetoric of "It's okay to be prejudiced against an entire group based on the actions of a select few," so, uh...

99% of mutants cannot wipe out humanity.

90% of mutants cannot cause widespread harm.

But, sure, because of that select few, you say it's okay to be prejudiced against the ENTIRE group.

Explain.

SaikyoStyle posted...

Toonstrack got suspended again. Try to guess why. I think youll be pleasantly surprised.

Don't worry. In a few weeks, when he returns, he'll say he has barely ever been suspended, which will eliminate this from his record, because... Y'know, reasons.

LightningThief posted...

The only point people are making is mutants and real life marginalized groups are not an apples to apples comparison.

They really should not be compared to bigotry against black, Asian, Latinos, LGBT, etc as the same.

No one at least that I can see (tbf I only skimmed the topic) is saying bigotry is okay.

Nobody has been able to explain why they can't be compared, other than "A select few mutants are dangerous," so, uh...

Would you like to give it a try?

Would you like to be the one who makes an argument for why it's okay to be prejudiced against an entire group based on the actions of a select few?

LightningThief posted...

Who is saying this?

I think their point is that people like Captain America and Ant-Man, who have or atleast exhibit powers, are pretty much never portrayed as being hated/subjugated, whereas even weak mutants are, simply for being... Mutants.

UnfairRepresent posted...

But a dude who can wipe out all life on the planet within secconds if he chose to? You're saying it's prejudice to safeguard that?

As has been stated in this topic... Repeatedly, so I'm not sure how you missed it, but... A vast majority of mutants in the Marvel world can NOT do that, their powers are ultimately harmless in the grand scheme of things. Thus, what you're actually arguing in favor of is being prejudiced against an entire group based on the specific actions/assumptions of a select few, which is... You know, racism.

Mechu posted...

I use a plastic cover

This. I bought one of those microwave domes or whatever you call them from Ikea.

Trumble posted...

Look, they're trying to throw us off. AssultTank probably just has some other trick to avoid moderations.

Adblocker, more like modblocker

It's not his sister, it was a joke that they looked alike.

That said, apparently several people who did think it was the sister posted "Nothing wrong with this," which made it go from a joke to just... A hilarious confession, from certain types.

The Spishak skits

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5nvzZUqHfs

Naysaspace posted...

no but they will mod you more harshly based on preconceived notions.

Preconceived notions like your post history?

TimeForAction posted...

Every person Ive interviewed is the hardest worker I could get

This is, objectively, impossible to know or prove. They're who you THINK is the hardest worker. Which kinda goes along with the idea that... Being a good liar/"salesman" goes a long way. Maybe you are the hardest worker, maybe you aren't. Regardless, you've gotta sell the idea that you are.

CARRRNE_ASADA posted...

Can't wait, though it sucks such an important part was cut from the game and sold as DLC. Also cool that the song from the OG 16 trailer will finally be used.

Is there any proof it was literally cut? Or do you mean more story-wise?

lolife67 posted...

We're talking comics, not movies.

Yeah, the confusion is people are talking comics, famfam was talking MCU. Miscommunication, it's all good.

I think it's easy to forget, when deep in comic discussion, that a lot of people's main reference is the MCU itself.

Jaguar34 posted...

From a legal standpoint, I'm curious as to what the tip was.

Sounds like everything hinges on the fact that he had the real thing, but can he actually be arrested for the AI stuff? If the stuff he was arrested for just ends up being a 22-year-old midget can he still be arrested for everything else?

Crazy to think that if he was a public school employee the Teacher's Union would give him much more protection than he gets as a private school guy. Tax dollars would go towards his protection. Him having a small amount of stuff is convenient for the people that conducted the search, I will say. There may not have been a case otherwise. Those boys weren't arrested for what they did either, just expelled.

Both parties would lose their shirts in a civil case but a criminal one? I'm not sure.

I'm curious about this, as well. I think if he used real images to create the AI, that may be illegal? Like, if he used yearbook photos to create AI porn, he used a real image to do so. I'm very curious how this would go, legally.