Topic: What the fuck? (Read 315110 times)

sei · « **Reply #1680 on:** December 14, 2009, 06:53:40 PM »

Quote from: Catloaf on December 14, 2009, 10:11:47 AM

Further NYT gift-guide WTF: EVE online made they're Videogames of 2009 list.

:iamdisappoint:

SCD · « **Reply #1681 on:** December 14, 2009, 07:33:34 PM »

This is the most amazingly hypocritical campaign I have ever seen

sei · « **Reply #1682 on:** December 14, 2009, 07:54:11 PM »

Also one of the most eye-searing—that header. Jesus Christ.

Catloaf · « **Reply #1683 on:** December 14, 2009, 08:17:01 PM »

Quote from: sei on December 14, 2009, 06:53:40 PM

Quote from: Catloaf on December 14, 2009, 10:11:47 AM
Further NYT gift-guide WTF: EVE online made they're Videogames of 2009 list.
:iamdisappoint:

Fuck off, I hadn't made that mistake is months. I'm not thinking well, I have finals this week.

Burrito Al Pastor · « **Reply #1684 on:** December 14, 2009, 08:19:31 PM »

That's the opposite of how finals week is supposed to work.

Catloaf · « **Reply #1685 on:** December 14, 2009, 08:20:16 PM »

That's the joke.

Sharkey · « **Reply #1686 on:** December 14, 2009, 08:30:03 PM »

Quote from: Sniper's Calm Deliberation on December 14, 2009, 07:33:34 PM

This is the most amazingly hypocritical campaign I have ever seen

Oh, Jesus Shitspitting Christ. Please, please just pretend that doesn't exist. It's bad enough I have to see their vans parked around here. Berkeley has enough embarrassing cliches without those assholes in the mix.

Quote from: sei on December 14, 2009, 06:53:40 PM

Quote from: Catloaf on December 14, 2009, 10:11:47 AM
Further NYT gift-guide WTF: EVE online made they're Videogames of 2009 list.
:iamdisappoint:

Why comment on something weird and interesting when you can be pedantic about grammar?

Actually, other than that and DJ Hero their short list is pretty okay-ish. But yeah, EVE really stands out as something the author just happens to have a hardon for. It's way too niche and dated for the fucking Times.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #1687 on:** December 14, 2009, 08:52:18 PM »

Aside from the horrible color scheme and that activist women are a threat to Sharkey's.. whatever, why should I hate Code Pink?

Disposable Ninja · « **Reply #1688 on:** December 14, 2009, 09:03:29 PM »

I think that article was advocating that we leave Afghanistan so that the people could start a Revolution against the government we constructed for them.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #1689 on:** December 14, 2009, 09:09:47 PM »

Main crux of their argument seems to be that they want Americans to stop bombing the shit out of Afghanistan. Which I suppose is a valid plea to make.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #1690 on:** December 15, 2009, 10:50:03 AM »

Australia looks to China for lead, decides it wants to start censoring the internet.

SCD · « **Reply #1691 on:** December 15, 2009, 11:00:21 AM »

Quote from: Constantine on December 14, 2009, 09:09:47 PM

Main crux of their argument seems to be that they want Americans to stop bombing the shit out of Afghanistan. Which I suppose is a valid plea to make.

Except that their raison d'Etre of most rational pink movements involve womens rights. UN refugee camps hold more promise for womens rights, than the Taliban's enhancement on Pashtunwali to the point of removing even the sight of women from public spaces through clothing, window placement, and procedural norms in urban spaces which once were not controlled by pashtun codes.

That and more troops = more violence was disproven two years ago rather thoroughly. Flashpoint, acceptance, de-escalation.

Gah, I get your point on the term hypocritical. Code pink is antiwar, not womens rights and their arguments are on the cost of the logistical strain of operating within a landlocked country with little present infrastructure. Game, set, match.

----

On another note, Australia has also done weapons seizures in the past decades. Check your NRA propaganda for more.

Büge · « **Reply #1692 on:** December 15, 2009, 11:31:11 AM »

Quote from: Constantine on December 15, 2009, 10:50:03 AM

Australia looks to China for lead, decides it wants to start censoring the internet.

Oh please, that's ridiculous. Frocto, would your country XXXX XXX XXXXXXX XX XXXXX?

sei · « **Reply #1693 on:** December 15, 2009, 06:55:42 PM »

norn mentioned that the censorship was tenuously predicated on some sort of protect-the-children bullshit, but the second quote below makes me doubt it'll be confined to things of that sort.

Quote from: http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/web-filters-to-censor-video-games-20090625-cxrx.html

Australia is the only developed country without an R18+ classification for games, meaning any titles that do not meet the MA15+ standard - such as those with excessive violence or sexual content - are simply banned from sale by the Classification Board, unless they are modified to remove the offending content.

So far, this has only applied to local bricks-and-mortar stores selling physical copies of games, but a spokesman for Senator Conroy confirmed that under the filtering plan, it will be extended to downloadable games, flash-based web games and sites which sell physical copies of games that do not meet the MA15+ standard.

This means that even Australians who are aged above 15 and want to obtain the adult-level games online will be unable to do so.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Australia

On 22 May 2009 it was disclosed in the press, citing wikileaks.org, that the Australian Government had added Dr Philip Nitschke's online Peaceful Pill Handbook (hosted at www.yudu.com [7]), which deals with the topic of voluntary euthanasia, to the blacklist maintained by the Australian Communications and Media Authority used to filter internet access to citizens of Australia.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #1694 on:** December 15, 2009, 07:50:11 PM »

My hometown is in the news!

Starving snakes, dead rodents found in Texas raid

Quote

Hundreds of rodents were crammed in small containers covered with wire, and many had killed and eaten each other, Davies said. Other animals were kept in feeding troughs, and there were numerous stacked shipping containers still holding turtles and other reptiles that had been sent to the company, Davies said. About 200 iguanas were in one small room, she said.

sei · « **Reply #1695 on:** December 15, 2009, 07:58:10 PM »

Quote from: http://www.viceland.com/int/v15n12/htdocs/conversation-porn-rangers-408.php

How long do you show the kids pornography?

Nate: As long as it takes.

EJ: Sometimes it takes a long time. What invariably happens is, they’ll watch it, and like Nate says, it’ll take a while; sometimes three or four hours. And then they will—they’re children, they’re human, they’re flawed in that respect—they will react to it and, being impressionable, we ask them if they want to masturbate.

The Onion has nothing on this.

Mongrel · « **Reply #1696 on:** December 15, 2009, 08:02:39 PM »

Oh Vice Magazine...

Royal☭ · « **Reply #1697 on:** December 15, 2009, 08:19:41 PM »

Thank you, sei, for that fake article for some reason?

Brentai · « **Reply #1698 on:** December 15, 2009, 08:26:34 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0KOfTV1dbc

Royal☭ · « **Reply #1699 on:** December 16, 2009, 04:36:14 PM »

South Dakota ex-lawmaker Ted Alvin Klaudt tries to claim copyright of own name to prevent newpapers from reporting on him raping his two daughters

Quote

A former South Dakota lawmaker convicted of raping his two foster daughters has sent news organizations what he claims is a copyright notice that seeks to prevent the use of his name without his consent.

A letter and an accompanying document labeled "Common Law Copyright Notice" said former state Rep. Ted Alvin Klaudt is reserving a common-law copyright of a trade name or trademark for his name. It said no one can use his name without his consent, and anyone who does would owe him $500,000.

This guy is a class act. Spread the word.

News:

Author Topic: What the fuck? (Read 315110 times)