Conversation
Notices
-
OrangeEliminator
Weenie Wanga Langa Genghis Khan
, Cerulean Lulamoon-Spark
, deadname
, Michael
, RDN's Lucifer
@ponydude2143 @nerthos @ceruleanspark @fallinwinter @flaxx Yes, it IS a joke. Science > religion, you see. Its a joke on a joke on a joke and none of you understood (apart from flaxx). I thought the "dawg" and "bro" would make it obvious. But pony fetish still = sick and wrong
Friday, 16-Dec-11 14:41:13 UTC from web-
@cypresswolf That. Is hilarious. Definitely favorited. Luckily for me, I don't have an NSFW pony folder. So Twilight isn't mad at me. *Happy dance* Also, that smiley scares me.
-
@cypresswolf Well, it stares into my soul. And I don't like it.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@cypresswolf If you actually have a NSFW pony folder, you are creepy.
-
@extremelyextreme Exactly, all the pony should go to the same folder!
-
@flaxx Brain Bleach - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G55zj41m1E&context=C334bd38ADOEgsToPDskL7zvnqR1fuPVGVcJyj69aO - My Little Seinfeld
-
@cypresswolf What is going on here
-
@flaxx It's audio from an episode of Seinfeld where Elaine shows off her bad dancing mixed with Twilight's adorkable dance in Sweet & Elite. Nothing? Here's Derpy Hooves - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWG0KLSJi8g&context=C3e166aaADOEgsToPDskKr7g7utyW7Qkgb8qGc-4qy - Derpy Cardcaptor
-
@cypresswolf I admit it was funny, but I haven't really seen much Seinfeld at all. :P And that one is awesome, even though I have no idea what it's a parody of.
-
@cypresswolf There is no valid excuse for having a pony fetish, it is plain creepy and wrong. Jesus died for your sins dawg, stop sinning bro.
-
@extremelyextreme This is hilarious.
-
@extremelyextreme No offense, but that's awfully near sighted. Not everyone believes in the same things.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@extremelyextreme Are you serious?
-
@extremelyextreme Do you know what goes perfectly with religious zealotry? Stakes! Let me bring mine :D
-
@ponydude2143 I know. But I'm pretty sure he's a troll. Nopony in their right judgement would be serious about that.
-
@ponydude2143 To be fair whether they do or not shouldn't be an issue to begin with.
-
@ponydude2143 Even if they do have the fetish, I'm not happy with them getting judged for it (around here at least)
-
@ceruleanspark It's not like we're in the middle ages anymore. He's just going to be excluded for saying such things.
-
@ponydude2143 I'm used to being hated for saying things too directly. Still, all that "sins" thing, it has been obsolete for... three hundred years? You can state your hate for fetishes, but with a valid reasoning, not with zealotry.
-
@extremelyextreme I understood it. That's why I said that about the stakes.
-
@extremelyextreme Oh, I just find it funny how you imply there is such a thing as right and wrong, apart from your own opinion.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@extremelyextreme There are some problems with this logic, however I will leave it at that so that we can talk about ponies or something.
-
@flaxx Right and wrong are only social implications that we allow ourselves to follow or effect us. We as a race will never achieve a full comprehension of technology unless we lose this baggage.
-
@ponydude2143 I'm from a christian family. But, "Jesus died for your sins", considering he died TWO THOUSAND YEARS ago, I think is zeañotry.
-
@nerthos *zealotry
-
@ponydude2143 Zealot doesn't necessarily imply intolerance for christians in general, just the zealous ones. (Also, raving about sin doesn't necessarily imply Christian)
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@ponydude2143 My points are /always/ good baby
-
@extremelyextreme "Right and wrong" are a way devised to justify laws, so that the whole race don't burn itself down in chaos and anarchy.
-
@ponydude2143 It's next to the L. I'm a spanish native speaker, so I use that key regularly.
-
@nerthos But that implies the law effectively enforce things. And what right and wrong does it enforce? Tat it is OK to be bribed by large corporations? That multi-million fraud is better than stealing around $100 in goods? The Law is controlled by the government, which means it will never be "correct" or "just". See: Russia, China, N. Korea and the majority of the world.
-
@ponydude2143 Oh, thank you xD I'm still at like, 70% of grasping it completely.
-
@extremelyextreme I can put examples of countries: US, China, etc. But that's not what I meant. I said "They were invented to JUSTIFY laws" So, they're a way to say "you should do that, and not that other thing" But, that was thousands of years ago, and, with the intelectual differences between the most bright and most dumb individuals, it's easy now to modify these two concepts for convenience.
-
@extremelyextreme The problem with this is that it's near impossible to make anything an extreme because doing so makes it untrue. Yes, law can be corrupt sometimes, but anarchy doesn't always mean freedom either. It would be just as easy for a world without law to be led astray or for chaos to ensue.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@fallinwinter Anarchy only works when the difference between the most dumb and most bright individuals are about 25%. Otherwise, there will be always someone in charge.
-
@nerthos I know you said it was to justify laws, which is why I explained how hollow and corrupt the legal system is. Right and wrong are pure opinion, and the legal system is based upon that. That is why everywhere has different laws, and why none of them will ever really work.
-
@nerthos ello, bro
-
@extremelyextreme They don't work because they lack enforcement. Give me the control of the police force of one single country, and in five years, there will be no theft, murder, or drugs on the streets. The population will be reduced at least a 20% in the process, but I can live with that.
-
@theawesomepinkpony Hi there :D
-
@nerthos hello look how empty my hall way is http://ur1.ca/6r0jk
-
@theawesomepinkpony Haha, ghost town.
-
@nerthos @extremelyextreme You both realize this is pretty much one giant circle right? Corrupt Laws feed into Anarchy which leads into a single power taking control of the masses which becomes the law which becomes corrupt which turns into anarchy. THERE IS NO WINNER IN THIS DEBATE.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@nerthos lol yeah, so what's up ?
-
@nerthos And the police brings in another variable. What if that officer is corrupt, helping is mates do insurance scams? And your method implies simply outright killing all people (see "The population will be reduced by at least a 20% in the process") that break your law in your opinion. You would be creating a police state, and you would be Big Brother. Yes, you would have alot of money and power, at the cost of oppressing everyone else. USSR, anyone?
-
@fallinwinter That's why I like inquisitorious paladins! They make everything work, by adhering to a code of honor and principles, and purging the world of everything that doesn't fits.
-
@fallinwinter Yeah, well, that is just, like, your opinion, man.
-
@theawesomepinkpony Not much, I was going to play games, but the timeline resurected. So now I'm having a debate about right and wrong.
-
@nerthos ...which would be fought by the people who don't agree leading to anarchy who either win and overthrow the law until someone else believes it to be wrong or "corrupt" or you will just win and once again be the law until someone thinks you're wrong again and fights back. So...as I was saying. =P
-
@nerthos debate about what ?
-
@extremelyextreme I would check the police, so there will be no corrupt officers. Though, I'll only opress those who walk off the way of honor and the principles stated by it. So, putting it simple, you'll hate it only if you want to screw other people for personal benefit.
-
@extremelyextreme I'm okay with this. It allows me to stand in the middle of the two of your sides and just watch for the most part.
-
@fallinwinter No, there will be no place for revolution. That's the difference between that kind of paladins and normal police. They have the power and enforce it at an almost divine level. Any revolution woukld be wiped before starting. A law force should be able to fight the entire population they control at the same time.
-
@theawesomepinkpony How right and wrong exist or noth, and how laws are corrupt.
-
@nerthos noth ? what's that
-
@nerthos i'm confused right now.
-
@theawesomepinkpony I typed it wrong, and corrected it in another post.
-
@nerthos oh, now what was this debate about ?
-
@nerthos The point I'm trying to make isn't that you will lose eventually. The point I'm trying to make is that there's always pretty much three stages that happen no matter who wins or loses all in one giant circle. 1. Person/Group with power takes over and enforces their "law" (This law being anything from strict rules to pure chaos and freedom) 2. Individuals who do not like this idea decide to oppose it and rebel against it. 3. Regardless who wins the winner then takes over the remains of the war and molds and enforces their "law" There is no right and wrong. It's simply whose side is stronger.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@nerthos K, Big Bro. Its is really easy to say that, and that is what every Policing function ever has tried to achieve. What makes yours so different, Mr "I have no police training whatsoever yet am still the best"?
-
@fallinwinter Yup. Exactly. So we need to create an entity with more power than any other, with a logic sense of "right" to fix that problem.
-
@nerthos hey bro, what was the debate about again ?
-
@extremelyextreme I did it all my life. Be it IRL, WoW guilds, etc. My whole life works around honor.
-
@theawesomepinkpony Right and wrong.
-
@theawesomepinkpony The law, right + wrong (and how it is a total fallacy created by society to impose sit) and how Nethos thinks his police state would be different from the rest.
-
@fallinwinter @nerthos To add to this, yes, you may have the longest reign ever due to keeping a strong hold on everyone. This won't change the fact that not everyone will like your idea regardless of whether you killed them or not. The fact remains that to have had reason to kill them, they were against your belief. In all this means that your belief that you will hold a stable community is true, however your belief that your ability to hold a community who will always believe your system is right is not true.
-
@extremelyextreme oh okay, i'm just going to stay out of it.
-
@nerthos So, you will base your Police State on a WoW guild and things you have done personally, which you probably have no idea if it made everyone happy/unhappy or was correct in their opinion. Which is an impossible feat anyway.
-
@fallinwinter Yeah, I know they eventually will start to hate the system. But I don't care, the point is to force society to be stable and work, regardless of if they like it.
-
@extremelyextreme No, I'll base it in the fact that I'm able to discern how to make things work, no matter if others like it or not.
-
@nerthos And, I'm pretty sure lots of guys didn't liked how I worked things. But I don't care, because all worked exactly as planned, with good results, and in the end, their ways were proved wrong.
-
@nerthos So, where is your PhD in Discerning how to make things work? What make you the sole person that is more qualified to run your Police State (which is beginning to sound alot like a dictatorship) than anyone else?
-
@extremelyextreme Oh, a PhD is not needed for that kind of things. It's just about facts. If someone proves more capable than me, I'll just be overthrown, that's a fact. Only the one with the greatest capabilities can mantain the throne.
-
@nerthos Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say we create a computer who never fails, never crashes, and never makes a mistake. Let's also for the sake of argument say that we are somehow able to program everything you believe is right into this computer. Even if this were to happen, and it's laws were enforced regardless of who opposed it. YOU'RE BOTH STILL RIGHT. YOU have created a "working" system (this being in the sense that no one lives long enough to do anything about it) which cannot be proven wrong simply because you are taking what you think is the "lesser of two evils" by ignoring everyone else's way and making your way the right way by being the only way. At the same time @extremelyextreme is also right because he is saying that your system is similar to other systems. Your system is very much like other systems in the sense that it is being forced on them without giving them the choice to feel differently about it.
RDN's Lucifer likes this. -
@nerthos And that will totally work. "Oh, if I am bad at the job, I will just be other-thrown. Because I will be totally open to the idea of an angry group of rebels potentionally imprisoning, torturing and killing me because they don't like how I rule this country. I will not fight the rebellion atall, because they are obviously right. I will also know that whoever is coming in will be better than, and not just a smooth talker looking for power. I know this because everyone striving for such a position is a good, wholehearted person with no other goals than to make the world a happy place of rainbows"
-
@fallinwinter Oh, I don't have a problem with them leaving to an island and burning themselves to death in their own chaos. But you, man, are the voice of reason.
-
@extremelyextreme I never said that I'm not going to fight them. That's not how it works. They need to beat me to take the throne, so, if they win, they have proven they're better than me in strategy and controlling the masses.
-
@nerthos Hi Gadaffi. And military strategy = the right to rule the country, now? We are now a Military State.
-
@extremelyextreme If they beat me, and take the control, they will either handle the country right, or suffer and starve for their idiocy. I'm ok with either option. They would had proven me wrong in my ways, or proven me right in my reasoning about "they're all idiots who can't live for themselves" I don't have any problem with Gadaffi. And you should know, the same people who fighted to overthrow him, fighted years ago to make him rise to power. They suffered for being idiots.
-
@nerthos The Gadaffi comment more so related to you sitting on the porcelain throne until some bugger comes up and pops a cap in you. Gadaffi got in because he was a smooth talker, he said what the people wanted to hear. So, are the people of Libya idiots for picking the bloke that offered the best deal? What makes the person kicking you off your porcelain throne any better?
-
@nerthos The point I want to try and make here is that you both have valid arguments. The problem I read: (I speak for no one else)have with your option is that if you succeed then you'd basically have given up hope that there's a better solution by ignoring everyone elses possibly better solution. What's worse is that the way you say this is that you don't care whether people dislike your way of thinking they just have to deal with it. This means that it is very possible that you and a very select few will be happy. In other words you're being a tyrant who keeps those few you care about, the ones who believe in your way of doing things,from killing each other and instead killing off those who have different opinions from yours regardless of whether their opinions were still that murder is not good. This is why I take a different side from both of you. Id rather take a law that can change given time and the willingness to do so that makes mistakes over one who ignore all but themselves
-
@extremelyextreme You think they have the right to complain, when they were in that situation BECAUSE THEY WERE STUPID ENOUGH to listen to some guy and follow him? They deserve their fate. I don't say the guy who will beat me will be better than me. If he's worse, the guys who followed him will suffer the fate they deserve, being exploited.
-
@fallinwinter I only judge people by theyr capabilities and princiles, no matter if they're close to me or not. I never said anything about happyness, just about how to make everything work. If they want to be happy, they can simply go to other place, instead of trying to fight.
-
@nerthos *their *principles
-
@nerthos You truly are ignorant. "It is their fault for electing the guy that seemed to be the best deal, they deserved the years of oppression. They also deserved the secret police killing them and their families, or taking them away. This is because they elected him in, it is the peoples fault that Gadaffi stayed in power longer than previously agreed, and they should be blamed"
-
@extremelyextreme Yes. Exaclty. I believe that if you cannot see what you're doing, you deserve your fate. The present is the result of the actions of the past. I'm talking about not letting them screw themselves. But, as @thatonepony said, we should stop talking here about this, no matter how entertaining it is.
-
