Author Topic: On the recurrence of discussions  (Read 7628 times)

AFK

  • We all
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 73111
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #30 on: June 11, 2012, 02:47:16 am »
Good luck with that.

That was directed just as much at you as it was at <<someone that probably had an extremely good reason to change their screenname to "TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS" ::) >>



Meh, I've had a couple of weak moments and taken some digs at AMB, but I think I've been pretty respectable compared to the opposing side.  Though Twid has been a good Joe, I must say.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

Tiddleywomp Cockletit

  • La Mano Famosa del Infierno
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 151927
  • Interweb Horrormonkey of Love
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #31 on: June 11, 2012, 02:56:14 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

THIS.

Show me something worth a shit and I have no problem ceding a point or even the whole tamale.

Close off and mouth the party line and it's shit-flinging time.
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division

chimes

  • (epimetheus, but epimetheus was an Accursed F5er)
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 16294
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #32 on: June 11, 2012, 03:17:32 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Then don't pretend you're having a discussion, just to ignore whatever they say.

I guess I have a basic respect for everyone that you guys don't. I dunno. And I don't mean that condescendingly. It just looks like the way it is. My naivete? Maybe.
what is this kid talking about?

post-singularity pocket orgasm toad of righteousness

Tiddleywomp Cockletit

  • La Mano Famosa del Infierno
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 151927
  • Interweb Horrormonkey of Love
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #33 on: June 11, 2012, 03:45:47 am »
Uhhh, dude...

...

...

this is PD.
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division

N E T

  • Dickless Titwank
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 17699
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #34 on: June 11, 2012, 04:29:41 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Then don't pretend you're having a discussion, just to ignore whatever they say.

I guess I have a basic respect for everyone that you guys don't. I dunno. And I don't mean that condescendingly. It just looks like the way it is. My naivete? Maybe.

Maybe you're born with it.

“It's too bad that whole families have to be torn apart by something as simple as wild dogs.” — J A C K   H A N D E Y

"Open your ass and your heart and mind will follow." — C H E S T E R   M A I N A R D

Placid Dingo

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 27316
    • View Profile
    • Me!
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #35 on: June 11, 2012, 04:37:32 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Is that relevant?

How many years should you hold your bladder before pissing in the bath? Whoever happens to be in the bath at the same time has to cop the consequences even if you feel your long term tolerance had been justifiably exhausted.

I might remind you that you snarled at me and said I was 'blowing my own ass-trumpet' when I mentioned that a study suggesting closing marijuana shops increased crime sounded suss. That particular study was then retracted; what did the insult, the snark etc add to our ability to have that conversation? Based on this I can't help bit think you're foolig yourself if you claim that this response is reserved for people who've long term tested your patience。

Going after the person, not the argument sets the tone. And knowing the history of the argument makes that more effective. I'm 100% with Nyx on this one.

Really as I've followed the drugs threads there's two views.

Prohibition has issues and these issues would be made smaller by ending it.

Or

Prohibition has issues but the cost of removing it as a means to remove these issues do more harm than good (chiefly by normalizing the culture of marijuana and providing an easier and more appealing gateway into potential drug abuse.)

Instead it kind of feels like we go from 'rhwn is a braindead govt lackey', to 'lol imma troll you now' and then calling eachother idiots.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2012, 04:42:00 am by Placid Dingo »
If sheep entrails could in any way be related to the weather, i.e. sheep trails only originate where it rains, then you could use it as an accurate model for discerning what the weathers going to be like. Either, sheep shit makes it rain, or raining makes sheep shit. Sheep don't shit "randomly" sheep shit after they eat, it doesn't rain "randomly" it rains after water collects in the atmosphere.

The Right Reverend Nigel

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 604455
  • v=1/3πr2h
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #36 on: June 11, 2012, 04:43:32 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Then don't pretend you're having a discussion, just to ignore whatever they say.

I guess I have a basic respect for everyone that you guys don't. I dunno. And I don't mean that condescendingly. It just looks like the way it is. My naivete? Maybe.

I have a basic suspicious respect for everyone, until they absolutely prove, repeatedly, that they are not worthy of my respect by being themselves disrespectful, crapweasely douchecanoes. After that point I'm pretty much just going to make fun of them.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”

“People get used to anything. The less you think about your oppression, the more your tolerance for it grows. After a while, people just think oppression is the normal state of things. But to become free, you have to be acutely aware of being a slave.”
― Assata Shaku

chimes

  • (epimetheus, but epimetheus was an Accursed F5er)
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 16294
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #37 on: June 11, 2012, 04:49:54 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Then don't pretend you're having a discussion, just to ignore whatever they say.

I guess I have a basic respect for everyone that you guys don't. I dunno. And I don't mean that condescendingly. It just looks like the way it is. My naivete? Maybe.

Maybe you're born with it.



  :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!:
what is this kid talking about?

post-singularity pocket orgasm toad of righteousness

chimes

  • (epimetheus, but epimetheus was an Accursed F5er)
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 16294
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #38 on: June 11, 2012, 04:54:31 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Then don't pretend you're having a discussion, just to ignore whatever they say.

I guess I have a basic respect for everyone that you guys don't. I dunno. And I don't mean that condescendingly. It just looks like the way it is. My naivete? Maybe.

I have a basic suspicious respect for everyone, until they absolutely prove, repeatedly, that they are not worthy of my respect by being themselves disrespectful, crapweasely douchecanoes. After that point I'm pretty much just going to make fun of them.

That's all well and good. I guess I just haven't seen the same evidence. No reason for me to assume you haven't though. Proceed. Get down witcha bad self.
what is this kid talking about?

post-singularity pocket orgasm toad of righteousness

N E T

  • Dickless Titwank
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 17699
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #39 on: June 11, 2012, 05:01:02 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Is that relevant?

How many years should you hold your bladder before pissing in the bath? Whoever happens to be in the bath at the same time has to cop the consequences even if you feel your long term tolerance had been justifiably exhausted.

I might remind you that you snarled at me and said I was 'blowing my own ass-trumpet' when I mentioned that a study suggesting closing marijuana shops increased crime sounded suss. That particular study was then retracted; what did the insult, the snark etc add to our ability to have that conversation?

Going after the person, not the argument sets the tone. And knowing the history of the argument makes that more effective. I'm 100% with Nyx on this one.

Really as I've followed the drugs threads there's two views.

Prohibition has issues and these issues would be made smaller by ending it.

Or

Prohibition has issues but the cost of removing it as a means to remove these issues do more harm than good (chiefly by normalizing the culture of marijuana and providing an easier and more appealing gateway into potential drug abuse.)

Instead it kind of feels like we go from 'rhwn is a braindead govt lackey', to 'lol imma troll you now' and then calling eachother idiots.

You clearly haven't read the history of my arguments with RWHN as I only have recently started personally insulting him. He has lost my respect as someone who thinks for himself and demonstrates a complete lack of intellectual honesty in favor of an insulting array of fallacies.

That you're still butthurt about a "blowing your own ass-trumpet" comment suggests you need to stop taking yourself so seriously, and perhaps wear a helmet.

Sometimes, going after the person is justified, especially when they have shown themselves to be dogmatic true believers who will stoop to any sheisty rhetorical trick in a misguided belief that ends justify the means if it's for the children.

And your dichotomizing of the drug threads shows you haven't followed many of them very carefully. One of the more important arguments you're missing is the harm that prohibition actually does: costing people their livelihood, costing taxpayers a huge amount of money, seizing people's homes, letting people rot in a corrupt prison system that profits off of their incarceration, disproportionately disenfranchising the poor and minorities, making it okay for the government to have invasive control of your body and personal space—and all of these things harm children more than the drug itself.
“It's too bad that whole families have to be torn apart by something as simple as wild dogs.” — J A C K   H A N D E Y

"Open your ass and your heart and mind will follow." — C H E S T E R   M A I N A R D

The Right Reverend Nigel

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 604455
  • v=1/3πr2h
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #40 on: June 11, 2012, 05:04:32 am »
Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?

I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.

Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...


You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?

Nope, never said that.

Quote
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.

Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.

No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.

If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.

If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.

How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?

Then don't pretend you're having a discussion, just to ignore whatever they say.

I guess I have a basic respect for everyone that you guys don't. I dunno. And I don't mean that condescendingly. It just looks like the way it is. My naivete? Maybe.

I have a basic suspicious respect for everyone, until they absolutely prove, repeatedly, that they are not worthy of my respect by being themselves disrespectful, crapweasely douchecanoes. After that point I'm pretty much just going to make fun of them.

That's all well and good. I guess I just haven't seen the same evidence. No reason for me to assume you haven't though. Proceed. Get down witcha bad self.

Since I doubt you have meticulously followed every conversation I and others have been in with RWHN over the last 5+ years, yes, it's pretty safe to say that you are correct in saying that there's no reason for that assumption.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”

“People get used to anything. The less you think about your oppression, the more your tolerance for it grows. After a while, people just think oppression is the normal state of things. But to become free, you have to be acutely aware of being a slave.”
― Assata Shaku

Placid Dingo

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 27316
    • View Profile
    • Me!
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #41 on: June 11, 2012, 05:20:23 am »
Net, I've been called worse and I'm not phased. I'm just saying, it clearly isn't true that you are withholding judgement with great patience and only giving in at the final moment.

I guess this is the thing again though- everyone likes the way they post because they like it, and I don't remember the last time anyone's request to maintain an intellectual respectful atmosphere was met with anythig but rationalizations of why actually everything theyve ever posted was as it should have been. I'm starting to feel snippy about it so I'll eject from the whole topic now.
If sheep entrails could in any way be related to the weather, i.e. sheep trails only originate where it rains, then you could use it as an accurate model for discerning what the weathers going to be like. Either, sheep shit makes it rain, or raining makes sheep shit. Sheep don't shit "randomly" sheep shit after they eat, it doesn't rain "randomly" it rains after water collects in the atmosphere.

The Right Reverend Nigel

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 604455
  • v=1/3πr2h
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #42 on: June 11, 2012, 05:23:44 am »
What is up with all the control-freaking about what, how, where, and how often people post these days?

Is it my turn?
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”

“People get used to anything. The less you think about your oppression, the more your tolerance for it grows. After a while, people just think oppression is the normal state of things. But to become free, you have to be acutely aware of being a slave.”
― Assata Shaku

The Right Reverend Nigel

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 604455
  • v=1/3πr2h
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #43 on: June 11, 2012, 05:24:20 am »
If any of you fuckers post in my threads or more than once per day, there's going to be hell to pay.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”

“People get used to anything. The less you think about your oppression, the more your tolerance for it grows. After a while, people just think oppression is the normal state of things. But to become free, you have to be acutely aware of being a slave.”
― Assata Shaku

The Right Reverend Nigel

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 604455
  • v=1/3πr2h
    • View Profile
Re: On the recurrence of discussions
« Reply #44 on: June 11, 2012, 05:25:51 am »
There's not enough True Blood talk on this forum. Everything else you people talk about is stupid and pointless. I demand more Sookie.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”

“People get used to anything. The less you think about your oppression, the more your tolerance for it grows. After a while, people just think oppression is the normal state of things. But to become free, you have to be acutely aware of being a slave.”
― Assata Shaku