search results matching tag: forum

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (331)     Sift Talk (79)     Blogs (19)     Comments (1000)   

Black Child Abducted and Assaulted by White Supremacists

newtboy says...

?! Well, that seems dumb. I guess I opted out on both screens I use. I thought you just meant when you hover over the channel name the description doesn't appear, and that the channel front page hadn't changed.
Yes, this needs to be addressed one way or the other.

If we're going to have a kids channel only for kid friendly videos, it MUST be enforced or it's child abuse, like pasting porn in a highlights magazine and placing it in a pediatrician's waiting room. If not, it should be removed as a channel imo.

Posted to @lucky760 on sift talk forum.

Edit: please don't ignore that the description has been cut and pasted into comments by multiple sifters (tagged with his name so they aren't missed) repeatedly, and manually removed by multiple sifters only to be retagged "kids" repeatedly, so ignorance is not an excuse, it is absolutely done knowingly and intentionally to make a point.

eric3579 said:

They are not as far as i can tell and until they are i think it's a sift issue. One way or another I'd take it up with lucky.

The equality channels front page in VS6
https://i.imgur.com/zbbQ0eo.png

If the definitions were there i would personally hobble him as id consider it knowingly breaking the rules. Can't enforce something that doesn't exist anymore.

short comedy (Comedy Talk Post)

Paintball Flamethrower

moonsammy says...

I found some people talking about it in a forum, and one stated "It shoots a blend of paint from smashed and mixed paintballs."

Seems fairly legit really - still counts a paintball gun as long as it uses the same ammo.

Esoog said:

Paint sprayer? I didnt see any balls.

Hey Incels, women don’t owe you anything

Khufu says...

no one is owed anything, these "nice guys" as you call them are not that nice if they lose patience with their flawed strategy, then attack women.

how nice a person is doesn't matter, most women want someone who excites them/makes them laugh/is an action man/follows through on promises.

these incel people are not an internet group by coincidence... the internet is killing people's ability to be social, especially those people who would have already had trouble, but could have worked it out pre-internet, now people have internet forums as a crutch to help them never have to speak to real people ever and everything gets magnified.

scheherazade said:

The last comment about 'be a nice guy' is interesting.

I was listening to Joe Rogan Experience, and they mentioned something about how the genesis of the 'woman hater' is actually the forever-friend-zoned-nice-guy who gets so fed up with being 'taken for granted'/'shot down' that his niceness turns into hatred

It made sense to me. Essentially, the woman hater is what becomes of a boring nice guy who lacked the patience/endurance to wait for women his age to make their way through all the exciting unreliable men before being satiated (or just getting too old to fetch the interesting men's attention) and finally settling for the nice guy that was boringly always available.



And I get it. It plays into the human natural value system, where things that are scarce are more valuable.

The ahole is fleeting. You can't always have him, and if you do you can't hold him, so he has an element of scarcity, which creates value.

The nice guy will reliably stick around if you go with him, so he is less scarce, so he is less valuable. The lower value in turn makes him more likely to be single and always available, further reducing his scarcity, and further devaluing him, and further increasing his chances of being single. A feedback loop.

I suppose that there is also a 3rd path - the element of nice guys that just stop giving a crap before turning into haters, which makes them more scarce, which actually finally gets them attention, and they stop being single.

(And a 4th path - nice guy finds 'a girl who wants a nice guy from the start'. In my observation this isn't the typical case.)



Cases like this (forever alone nice guy, not specifically Mr Van Driver) are when I think 'arrangement' web sites create a good solution. The guys get to not be lonely anymore, and the women gets taken care of. Kind of plays into the nice guy natural instinct, too.

Amusingly, 'arrangement' may be a better fit for the forever-alone nice guys than 'waiting it out'.
In both cases (waiting vs arrangement) the women are mainly after stability/support.
The older women 'nice guy' matches with by 'waiting it out' would not have picked 'nice guy' if they still had the looks to keep pulling exciting men.
So, if you're gonna be with someone because they want you for support, why not just go with a younger woman and be up front about the situation. If it doesn't work out, either party can walk away. No messy divorce. Seems like a safer and more practical option.

(Not picking on older women, just observing that : as people get older, the single scene becomes more and more 'leftovers' that are 'left over for a good reason'. The odds of finding anyone worth while diminish with time, because the highest quality individuals get retained first. Wait long enough, and you're left with over the hill jaded pragmatists who once may have had looks but now have nothing left to offer. At which point, both 'arrangement' and 'being single' are legitimately better options.)



Regarding Mr. Van Guy specifically, I'm not sure if he had a chance. He had some social anxiety that made him unable to talk to people. So he was likely not gonna get a partner naturally, and was unlikely to succeed among professional peers well enough to get the financial security necessary to be some sugar daddy.

So, yeah, dude was likely a romantic dead end. Possibly even the same mental (brain developmental?) issues that made him unable to talk to people also made him susceptible to getting the sort of crazy tilted that allowed him to run people over. The dude could have actually been fated (circumstantially) to end up in tragedy. Just speculating, wouldn't shock me.

-scheherazade

DasDING written and performed by MIKE MASONI

Liberal Redneck: NRA thinks more guns solve everything

newtboy says...

You're kidding, right? You dismiss snopes which clearly you didn't read since you claimed he offered no peer reviewed data that was included there, but you link quora.com and snidely tell me to read twice?! Lol.

From quora.com "Quora is not a source of information or an editor of information. Quora is a forum, just like yahoo answers. So basically Quora is neither credible and neither not credible."

Not so good, absolutely not peer reviewed, but I read it anyway....and I note it repeatedly misleadingly shows OVERALL homicide rates, not the topic (firearm homicides), except at the very end to claim looking at just firearm homicide rates when discussing firearm laws and their efficacy is dumb because murder is murder, and to try to pretend the trend hadn't reversed and shot up for years before the law change at the fastest rate on the chart, and reversed sharply again shortly afterwards, instead claiming a relatively steady decline (I guess hoping we won't look closely at the graph).
Looking at just firearm homicide rates seems to tell a different story.

The other two you mentioned weren't linked, so I bothered to search out the first to find it's behind pay walls, so unavailable...not wasting my time twice. I'll have to assume they're the same caliber.
You claim you personally produced some peer reviewed studies, what about them? You must have them available for free where they were reviewed and published, no? So far, you aren't convincing.

harlequinn said:

The industry financially supporting the NRA doesn't mean the NRA "work for" the industry. Obviously you disagree and that's fine.

"You mentioned there were studies, but still didn't list any or any data, did you?"

Yeah, 4 posts up from yours. I'd read it twice to prevent yourself from making another error.

Aliens: The Ride - Planet Coaster Dark Ride

spawnflagger says...

according to planetcoaster forums, VR support is being considered for Planet Coaster.

As far as pneumatic chair, I don't think there's a consumer-affordable solution for that. (there are rumble chairs though, that can be programmed and most game engines support it)

testlump said:

Plug this in to a VR headset and a pneumatic chair and you'd be in for a hell of a ride.

Also, how great was the sound design in Aliens 1, 2 (SE) and 3 (Assembly Cut Obvs)? The maternal self destruct voice from the first movie never gets old.

Star Citizen 3.0 - First Hour in - 4K Ultra Widescreen

Star Citizen 3.0 - First Hour in - 4K Ultra Widescreen

Mordhaus says...

98, Starsiege Tribes forum led me there.

ant said:

I think the same for me. I remember Blue's News on dial-up in college. I think I was visiting his former Quake News too!

Donna Brazile: HRC controlled DNC and rigged the primary

newtboy says...

And the post 1990 borders of Texas include historically Mexican lands populated by Mexican people...so what. It was sovereign and Russia acknowledged that, agreed to it, and signed binding treaties ratifying it permanently.

Those keys and systems would have been quickly replaced had those treaties not been enacted...enough of them to be a deterrent. Had we not agreed to defend them and Russia agreed to never try to annex or otherwise take them over, they would have been a nuclear nation and safe from Russian expansion.

As I said, not defending them was a violation. I'm not defending the US's actions.
Opportunity kicked off Russian land grabs, make no mistake.

That statement reflects our undeniable obligation under clear international treaty, not any personally desire to be at war.
Nuclear powers often go to war...by proxy. We've been in one in Syria recently. Edit: according to Russia, they weren't there anyway, so they would be hard pressed to complain about US military in the Ukraine fighting what Russia said were all Ukrainians, no?

Regarding collusion-This isn't a legal forum, you can debate legal terminology and specific charges on one, here, we all understand what collusion means and none of us are swearing out specific legal charges.
Definition of collusion:secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose; acting in collusion with the enemy

Edit: As for the coup, many called it the revolution. It was a coup by the populace, who largely thought the elections were rigged for pro Russians. That said, it was probably a violation for us to eventually support it (I think we waited until after Russian incursions, though). It still, in no way, excuses the Crimean or Ukrainian invasions and annexations.

scheherazade said:

Ah, I see you didn't read the links.

Else you would know :

* The post 1990 borders of Ukraine include historically Russian lands populated by Russian people.

* Ukraine's nukes could not be to guard against Russia because Russia had the crypto keys and guidance control over Ukrainian nukes.

* U.S. support for the 2014 coup against Ukraine's government was arguably also a treaty violation. (I don't actually care about this one)

* Government corruption, rising nationalism, and anti-Russian sentiment, are what led to the coup, which kicked off the fighting, which led to Russian intervention, which led to the "land grabs".


(Anti-Russian sentiment was brewing for years before the 2014 coup. You can see it play out in the 2012 language law issue, which was one of the historical turning points leading up to conflict: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_Ukraine#Proposals_for_repeal_and_revision)


Sidenote, this statement is pure insanity : "We should be at war with Russia today over it's murderous expansions"
War with Russia would last less than an hour, and the only winner would be South America and Africa.
Nuclear powers can never go to war. I mean _never_ never.






Regarding collusion, here :
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/02/opinion/collusion-meaning-trump-.html

"
President Trump declared on Twitter: “There is NO COLLUSION!”
"
There ya go. A Trump declaration that the campaign was not illegally secretly coordinated (i.e. no collusion). Not backwards at all.

The link also explains the irrelevance of the term regarding legal issues.



-scheherazade

The Game that is pissing off the Alt Right

AeroMechanical says...

Meh. In my experience, for years now, whenever there is a game with nazis in it, there's some idiot, usually some 14 year old kid who is not real clear on the facts, on the Steam forums or Youtube or wherever who posts some rant about how the nazis really weren't all that bad or whatever. It's nothing new and not really something to get worked up about, but given the news cycle, presented an excellent marketing opportunity.

Say nay to Nonsensical Rifle Addiction (NRA)

newtboy says...

$40-$60 million more in undisclosed payments to Manafort surfaced last week....but Trump has nothing to do with the Trump for president campaign, does he?....and did I say collusion, or even Trump? Nope, but a guilty conscience hears accusations that never happened.
The Russians today are doing exactly what you do, pretending to be right wing nutjobs on left leaning sites, and lefty snowflakes on right leaning sites, pushing the narrative to all that the other guy is a total nut by making ridiculous, ignorant claims like you do. If you aren't being paid by Putin, you're working for him for free.

Jesus fucking Christ, Bob. Can you be more deluded and ignorant? Once again, your Russian text book of American history is 100% ass backwards.

Southern strategy: In American politics, the southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] As the Civil Rights Movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South to the Republican Party that had traditionally supported the Democratic Party.[4] It also helped push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]
Not Nixon courting the black vote.

Troll: Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement.
Definitely you, Dimitri. It's almost time to have lucky investigate your ip address to see if you're in Kiev or Moscow.

bobknight33 said:

Still ZERO Russians / TRUMP linkage of trump colluding to win the election. Keep dreaming --

There is Russian meddling but to mess with Clinton and to stoke the fires of discontent of black lives.

Russia/ Anti Clinton / BLM division YEP.

Southern strategy was Nixon attempt to gain black vote in the south. Wow Newt 1 instance of poor republican crap .... Yoo hoo -you got me there Newt 1 Bob 453. you still loose.

Democrats are littered with history destroying the black race. And you continue to push that agenda by keeping you head in the sand.

I hold the different opinion on this site but it is the correct opinion.


Troll-- I think not..Foolish ones like who believe their progressive elitist ideals are above reproach are the trolls.

Robin Williams - Fukitol

eric3579 (Member Profile)

Learn Colors With 3D Rugby Ball and Pacman For Kids Children



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon