Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

I'm so glad this forum has people older than me.

Happy being alive still.

At 12/23/14 05:04 PM, Sword-of-Kings wrote: No, I haven't. You've been here for 2 days and I don't know anything about you or the way you post yet. No personal jabs are going to be inflicted unless you're 12 or something. I've been here for 4 years and the only time anyone made fun of me for my age was when I was a 12 year old dumbass back in 2010. You say you're older than me, so nothing bad is going to happen if you're open about your age.

You shouldn't pull rankism. For one, is discourages new members, and we need new members because our current ones sucks. Second of all you don't know how long one's lurked or how many accounts they've had.

It wasn't polite to respond to a well thought-out post by demanding his age. I interpreted it condescendingly even if that's not what you intended.

You should have made a cock joke instead.

At 12/23/14 05:06 PM, Makakaov wrote: Humans are not 'miniature'. They're pretty medium weight when it comes to earth classification.

"Earth classification," as you call it, is "human classification," so of course you think they're medium. But there are goings-ons on every scale of physical existence.

We're smaller than giraffes, therefore your argument is invalid.

Are you fucking serious?

Not really.

Human is most certainly not mindless, and has one o most intelligent skulls on Earth. After all it holds one of the most developed brains on earth.

Can't argue with that. "Mind" as we know it is scaled to the magnitude of ourselves, and we do appear to have one o' the most efficient brains on Earth. Which we used to become an apex predator.

Most of humans are accustomised to education very nicely,

Irony irony irony irony.

and they understand hand signs.

Bees understand butt signs.

Yes we are very good signers. Even beyond hands, we have signs for everything. Our minds automatically makes signs for everything, even things which don't exist.

They also do understand apocalypse's signs. After all we know of such term and many see signs of apocalypse in usual things. There is even a chapter in bible devoted to that.

The Bible was way off. I'm talking more about perpetuating harmful systems and ways of living that drive human existence into hell, that have been around forever, and have yet to be squelched. People are unnecessarily and inexplicably evil sometimes.

Humans are usually raised by people who want to build a family and live a static life or continue family tradition.

Humans are usually raised by bored morons.

Your paraphrase is shit.

Troll.

At 12/23/14 04:37 PM, vixuzar wrote: guys calm down ... seriously it`s just one mistake ... you don`t have to get all angry over it

I AM GOING TO KILL MYSELF BECAUSE OF YOU.

At 12/23/14 04:44 PM, NeonSpider wrote: I don't think he's really angry. He's just being a sillypants.

:3

At 12/23/14 04:35 PM, Right-wing-hero wrote: Post a picture of yourself to see if your ugly and desperate or the "pussy man"

Troll.

At 12/23/14 04:30 PM, NeonSpider wrote:

At 12/23/14 04:25 PM, Newgaf wrote: Apostrophes don't pluralize words, people.

Grave accent marks, my friend. Grave accent marks.

It's not an accent, it's the very core of meaning!

"Trust fall is." "Belonging to the trust fall." IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

I'M SHITTING MY PANTS OVER THIS.

...first three replies...

It's because life gets by by being sexual. No sex, no life. We are life, we are primates, we're going to be thinking about sex 100% of the time with about 60% of our brains.

That's like bees saying, "I sure do think about the queen a lot, even when I'm doing normal things."

Apostrophes don't pluralize words, people.

At 12/23/14 03:16 PM, Right-wing-hero wrote: Hey guys this is a little offensive there's no need to call me an idiot , because I couldn't spell Buddhism, it's not a word I see alot.

They're assholes. Flamers and flamebaiters. All the same, get a spellcheck extension.

Also Muslims regularly enjoy trolling Christians and Jews alike. This can be proven (just look a yahoo answers" and I'm sayin it shouldnt be religions debates but a club where like minded people can discuss there relashinoship with god.

A Theology Club? Not a bad idea -- I don't know if one exists. I basically agree, though, that an entire forum (or board, rather) would be inappropriate for Newgrounds.

The Politics board is important. Politics have to do with current events, statistics, and substantiated opinions. Religion is metaphysical, unprovable, and almost always unsubstantiated.

Wii motion controls were a joke. PS3 motion controls were a joke. Kinect was a joke. That crazy PS3 golf ball wand was a joke. I see where you're coming from.

But it's good that companies are trying new things. IMO the Wii U mini-screen thing is cool. I liked my EyeToy back on the PS2.

I'd rather the Big Three fund more creative games, than more creative ways to play the games. The controller -> box -> screen setup should still be sufficient.

@Makakaov

Humans are miniature predators that should be eliminated from every ecosystem. They're wild, and are even at times violent to their parents after education. The gods are usually fooled by their look which their hair gives them, but if you actually look at man's face objectively, you'll clearly see the mindless predator's skull. Humans are too dumb to be educated, or even recognise the apocalypse's signs. They're usually raised by losers, who have a subconscious need to be constantly used and ignored.

At 12/23/14 10:22 AM, FurryGod wrote: Ninja cats and Wizard Cats.

Wizards > Ninjas.

IMO life, or self-replicating carbon matter, is the result of physics and coincidence. No greater consciousness planted it in the universe, and it has no intrinsic value.

But it's still a pretty awesome accomplishment, in the name of meaninglessness. DNA and mutations in gene code, the development of thought and free will, emotions, opinions, observances of universal mathematical truth, music, love, hate, good, evil... I think it's important to concede that, while it may not have its roots in anything essential, life, and especially human life, is pretty fucking cool.

To attempt to construct a hierarchy of importance is futile. Almost all religions have done this, almost all of them put humans at the top, and almost all of them said that God made it so. All we are, in relation to the other species, is most powerful, and power is not the same thing as importance.

Our saving grace is the capability of rendering Evil and Good, even if they, too, are essentially insubstantial. We are the only species capable of trying to make sure that every living thing on the planet is comfortable, and that is exactly what we should do during our brief stint on Earth.

At 12/22/14 09:53 PM, TaintedLogic wrote: I'd love to play some of you guys on Cockatrice (downloadable software on which you can play Magic with anyone in the world who also has the app).

Getting on that.

At 12/22/14 01:46 AM, YenMuffin wrote:

At 12/22/14 12:12 AM, fmn335 wrote: post

Nope. I don't have any friends on NG.

Request sent.

Alright I'm going to try to keep this civil. We walk the fine line of keeping NG interesting and running away with a thread.

At 12/22/14 11:00 PM, Feelbone wrote: so to have a good argument you have to have perfect grammar, hmmmmm

You've been given the freedom to voice your opinion on a well-populated, diverse forum, about one of the most important topics in human history. I think it's the least you can do; it's like talking well in real life.

then this is all personal opinion and not fact, therefore you are arguing based on your own personal views on this matter instead of fact.

Your acceptance of preconceived notions of race is not "fact". "Fact" is not what people have believed for hundreds or thousands of years. Speaking as a species -- we've been wrong, and we'll be wrong again.

race is skin color and features

Okay, you are right though. We do need to address the thing we've called "race," and to what it has been used to apply. Skin color and features. Good. I get that.

there are sub groups of race such as irish white people

Ireland has been imperialized so many times that there was no true "Irish" until 1916, and they did it "in the name of God," so I'm sorry, but I have to be suspicious.

and egyptian black people.

Africa is fucking huge, and there are so many races within it. So many cultures decimated by the slave trade. Some are lost, and some are still alive. This happened and then everyone from there went "black."

Your opinion that this is all just my opinion is true.

there are college courses for black history, and they do look at all the history from the various cultures.

Where do you think I got the opinion that there is nothing essential about race? I think that race is an attempt to assign essential aspects to groups of human beings which has only ever fallen short of the truth. He's black, I'm white, she's half-Chinese, quarter Korean, quarter Russian -- WHO CARES???

This is the result of growing up American.

I mean stereotypes are lies, man. Do you think Italian women really love to cook, or that Italian men are just powerful and hungry?

BUT at the same time it's important, when purporting this ass-but-true world view, not to take away from the unity that has been achieved under the label, "Black." "Strategic essentialism".

even female history too

"Even female history too." See? Women are marginalized. Even them, too.

then let me clarify, usually those in power claim those who wish for equality are wanting to take over their own power structure, its a common argument for those who are against social issues.
lets check another box off the list on debate bingo: acting as if you are better than the opponent, mocking them in hopes it makes your point look superior. keep this up and you may go into ad hominem roads

Look at what you said.

Those in power claim, that those who wish for equality, are wanting (or want) to take over their own power structure (their own power structure?). It's a common argument, for those who are against social issues.

I literally have no idea what you are saying. Yes I was smug, I concede that and apologize for it, but what does "against social issues" mean?

I respect your opinion. It shouldn't be easy to derail hundreds of years of bad thought.

Now I am very tired of writing. Stone the atheist.

At 12/22/14 02:12 PM, Feelbone wrote: please dont tell me you are lazy enough not to google stuff yourself and expect sekhem to force feed you these facts. it should be common knowledge that john lennon wasnt the pure individual as many view him.

First of all, grammar. Capitalization. Periods. Apostrophes. You aren't texting.

I was in a hurry to band practice. It isn't unheard of that one should substantiate their claims when they make a point. The onus is at least equally on him.

"Black" isn't a race. Africa was full of hundreds of ethnic, religious, and linguistic cultures before Whitey came along, calling them all "black". You are just reinforcing Whitey's perspective.

i wonder why theres something called black history month then.

I love this -- its nonsense. "There's a Black History month, therefore your point is invalid." Nevermind debunking the actual point, just spew!

oh and white people also have many ethnic, religious, and linguistic cultures

Yes, and unlike Hitler and hillbillies I do not consider White a race, either, for the reasons you just copied from me. I'm against the unnecessary division of mankind. It's arbitrary and stupid, and it leads, time and time again, to violence.

P.S. -- I think you're just reluctant to acknowledge any plight (no quotes) from which you stand nothing to gain. You aren't interested in equality -- only supremacy, which is evil.

isnt this the same old shit anyone who hates change says, i do remember this being on topic during many events in racial history. even female history too

You just made no sense at all.

i normally stay away from race debates but this is absurd

You failed to form a thesis or back it up. D-.

At 12/22/14 11:29 AM, Sekhem wrote:

At 12/21/14 03:41 PM, Newgaf wrote: Women have had it worse throughout history.

they certainly did if they were living with the wifebeating john lennon

Source?

the "plight" of women does not in anyway compare to the suffering of the black race

Yeah you're right, they always have and still have it worse. In fact they're still being bred, bought, and sold.

"Black" isn't a race. Africa was full of hundreds of ethnic, religious, and linguistic cultures before Whitey came along, calling them all "black". You are just reinforcing Whitey's perspective.

P.S. -- I think you're just reluctant to acknowledge any plight (no quotes) from which you stand nothing to gain. You aren't interested in equality -- only supremacy, which is evil.

Nothing to do with Christmas. But it's accurate.

At 12/21/14 09:54 PM, IoTheEternal wrote: and one can argue that the mind altering flowers are cheating at what meditation would normally do for a person, once again handicapping them to not work for themselves, while slowly distributing wastes in the body and dumbing them down and lowering their concentration levels.

Trust me as one who has tried both -- meditation and marijuana are NOT the same thing. Heart palpitations and food cravings are nothing like selflessness. It's true, though, that THC might lead your thoughts down some... interesting roads, that you may not have otherwise stumbled upon. "Cheating?" Heck, you can't cheat life. You can have coffee in the morning to boost your energy, or drink an energy drink -- is that cheating?

I really don't have the answers, but again, I don't see the point of being straight-edge, especially within the parameters of this conversation. It seems to me, that substance experimentation is just as natural, good, and right as abstinence. In both cases, the subject simply wants to see what their experience would be like, given a certain set of self-imposed circumstances.

I will disagree with you up and down, however, that experimentation, or the original point -- taking meds, automatically sullys or invalidates one's experience. You, for instance, have probably contracted at least one life-threatening disease within your lifetime, and survived by taking dirty, abnormal pills. Who are you, to rob yourself of that all-enlightening experience, of death?

You choose to see it as a path to betterment, I choose to see it as a handicap to ones own self enlightenment, achievable on their own, and that is where the truth changes based on perception.

I don't see it as a path to betterment; everyone's lives are too different for me to prescribe any species-wide course of action. I generally believe that people should think for themselves.

And you're right -- it can be a handicap. Totally. But, automatically? I think you are speaking on behalf of too many people whom you haven't met.

Tl;dr -- Taking meds or experimenting with substances does not automatically make you not you, which is not to say that they can't.

At 12/21/14 07:24 PM, Seasons wrote: Here's what you should do: try paying more attention in English class.

I fucking love Newgrounds.

@ZE13 Don't worry about it pal. She'll probably get the help she needs now that she made as ass out of herself. Just forgive her and work on your own feelings.

At 12/21/14 08:44 PM, IoTheEternal wrote: So in my view, as cruel as it may sound, the you you have chosen to play as is the you you are meant to be, and everything else is an alteration. Sure drugs may make you "normal" - but what if the point of this "handicap" was to NOT experience normality?

Where you say "God," I prefer "Nature." I tend to see every living thing as an experiment by Nature upon itself. Or, alternatively, we are just lucky to have achieved consciousness, and there is no difference between life and, say, the movement of comets. All is governed by the laws of physics. Just so you know where I might be coming from.

And again, I get where you're coming from, but I don't think God or Nature can only be what it's "meant to be" (veeery dangerous choice of words for an existentialist) by being what you are defining, which is "straight-edge." Perhaps Nature wanted to see what would happen, for example, if a piece of itself were put on a planet occupied by magical mind-altering flowers, i.e. marijuana. In your own words, assuming one smokes, what if the point was to NOT experience normality?

And I could nit-pick, saying that certain foods and beverages cause stages of elation and depression, to the extent that it is impossible to define what God "meant" for one to be.

You'll be okay, and ultimately grateful that you changed your habits.

At 12/21/14 03:42 PM, IoTheEternal wrote:

At 12/21/14 03:40 PM, dinopirate23 wrote: i try to stay the same person, but no promises are made when im off my meds

if you are on meds, then that is a "you", and not a you.

you are the being that is simply who you are, without alterations.

Too arbitrary to be true. Who are you to determine what is the "alteration" and what is "who you are?" A chemical imbalance may represent an "alteration," which the meds then remove.

I get where you're coming from. It is often said that people become a different person when they, for instance, drink alcohol, but yours was not a sufficient answer.

For instance, again, what if someone experiences a trauma, which affects the way they behave? Is the pre-trauma character the "true them," lost forever, or is the "true them" closer to the actual, here-now character? The same goes for reading a book or following a direction -- anything that changes behavior or alters knowledge. Change does not represent a loss of self, unless all of us are lost.

Back on topic: I'm more or less the same guy in person. I disagree with strong attachments to identity, speaking for the sake of being heard (or typing to be read), and I try not to be rude. However it's nice to be able to proof-read my opinions before spewing them -- which would be wonderful in real life. That's the main difference.

P.S. -- I agree that there must be some colloquially agreed-upon standard, whereby alteration of the brain represents a loss of self. Victims of brain injury, and their families, often experience this. However it's just wrong to tell a person on meds that they are not themself, and we must sometimes excuse the drunk.

It's interesting. As an existentialist I'd like to submit that there is no self to gain or lose; only fortune and chaos.

NSFW at all.

Women have had it worse throughout history.

At 12/21/14 09:54 AM, saltovergray wrote: Any Planeswalkers still alive in here?

I'll join. I'm new. I started playing Magic last... August? So I'm pretty noob.

What have you guys been up to, deck building or otherwise?

Nothing fancy. I made a blue/artifact deck that wrecked for a while. It basically revolved around me getting my Juggernauts out with Whispersilk Cloaks or flying or some such noise. But I dismantled it recently.

My green deck is pretty good; it's all Heroic cards and good, cheap spells. I made a black/blue deck which, so far, sucks.

At 12/20/14 09:53 PM, Xenomit wrote: I remembered what he's talking about after I posted that, I've stated very clearly several times that I love horse cocks.

That's not sarcastic, I actually do.

I friggin love you Xenomit.

At 12/20/14 11:59 PM, Sekhem wrote:

At 12/20/14 11:46 PM, Newgaf wrote: If you even consider this an "option," you are crazy.

It's funny. No one calls groups of whites who protest against repressive legal systems (such as the Carbonari) crazy. Gee, I wonder why.

We're not talking about a protest here -- it's murder. And I don't know who those people are.

"Public lynchings?" That's ridiculous.

The growing trend of innocent men of a certain color being killed by "law enforcement" in public isn't a public lynching?

Sorry Charlie, five or six cases doesn't constitute a "growing trend." Neither would a dozen. I can see Eric Garner being stretched to fit the definition, but Michael Brown? And we continue...

Do you want the OED definition of a lynching? Lynching is the act of enforcing "Lynch law" or '[t]he practice of inflicting summary punishment upon an offender, by a self-constituted court armed with no legal authority'. I guess the officer who choked Garner had the "authority" to kill him for uh... being black?

First of all, good source. I love the OED.

So you kind of screwed yourself over here. Public lynchings weren't conducted by police officers, they were, by definition, performed by "self-constituted courts," i.e. vigilantes. Police officers have legal authority.

Eric Garner, the poor bastard, shouted at police officers and resisted arrest. I mean I think it was murder, but only because it was handled so very fucking poorly.

"Public lynching" just doesn't fit the bill. Sorry.

No. Innocent death shouldn't be celebrated (Ethics 101).

If you're part of a larger group of people who commit reprehensible acts and show no remorse or atonement, you are not "innocent."

Great. I'll go kill the black family down the street because my cousin was murdered by blacks.

Luckily that's a hypothetical, but you can see how your line of thinking is identical to that of a racist's. Hate, based on prejudice.

Besides you would be shit out of luck without police officers, the majority of whom risk their ass on a daily basis to protect citizens' lives. Maybe that's part of why you might hate them? Because you depend on them?

Hell, get mugged. Get your house robbed. You aren't going to call the Black Panthers.

Yes, I am an empathetic person and it saddens me that minorities are more likely to be assumed to be criminals. People should be judged on an individual basis, or if possible, not judged at all.

Thanks for your support. I'm sure it will prevent innocent blacks from being killed.

The fuck do you want from me? I'm not God, I didn't create this fucked-up world. At least I care.

The problem isn't racism. It's hatred.

P.S. -- "If it's okay to hate all cops because of the actions of less than 1%, then it should be okay to hate all minorities because of the actions of a much higher percentage. And it isn't."

You failed to address this paradox.

At 12/20/14 11:29 PM, Sekhem wrote: How do you feel about violent resistance in response to out-of-control police brutality?

You mean murder? I think it's wrong.

Since it's clear the methods of MLK have no place in an excessively militarized America (source, source, and source), is this the only option?

It isn't "clear"; those sources are only opinion pieces. It stands to reason that people only have sympathy when bad things happen to good people. If protesters act like uncivilized, violent assholes, then they will earn nobody's sympathy, nobody's support, and no progress will be made, ever.

If you even consider this an "option," you are crazy.

Since many public figures are cheering the public lynchings of black males such as Eric Garner and Michael Brown, is it now acceptable to spit it back in their face with this news?

"Public lynchings?" That's ridiculous.

No. Innocent death shouldn't be celebrated (Ethics 101).

Is this kind of retaliation completely unacceptable to you? Are you personally affected by the discriminatory policing of America?

Yes, murder is wrong, because I'm not a crazy person.

Yes, I am an empathetic person and it saddens me that minorities are more likely to be assumed to be criminals. People should be judged on an individual basis, or if possible, not judged at all.

Tell me what you think (and feel), Newgrounds.

If it's okay to hate all cops because of the actions of less than 1%, then it should be okay to hate all minorities because of the actions of a much higher percentage. And it isn't.

At 12/20/14 11:32 PM, Chocomilk wrote: Fuck this, I'm moving to Canada.

Boondocks?

I think you're splitting personality into two opposite halves which are not necessarily so. That's a really common human misconception -- that concepts are composed of binary opposites.

For example: Night and day. Is night truly the opposite of day? Not really; they're just different alignments of planets and stars, equally complex. Hot and cold. Cold is the absence of heat; there is no counter-acting "cold energy" which would constitute anti-heat. Gender. Are men and women "opposite" in any essential way? Do "male" and "female" even begin to describe the gender range we are working with today?

My point is that sometimes things appear to be binary, but they're really chaotic, parallel, loop-de-loop and transitive.

So I've been lonely and I've been not lonely. A lot of it's location. A lot of it's luck. You can feel lonely any time you want, really, because you're the only person you'll ever know. Everything you think, feel, see, or perceive happens through the lens that is you. Or you can feel connected, knowing that everyone is in that same boat.

Are you lonely, OP?

At 12/18/14 12:02 AM, Monster-64 wrote: Ramen is the best.

Out of your mind.

Butternut Squash, son!