I watch Jeopardy every night and Carlos has been cracking me up with his facial acrobatics. He's like a cartoon character. He's on a winning streak too.

I don't care what the originator says. I use the hard G as in "graphics". DEATH TO ALL SOFT G SAYERS.

They should qualify the title... "not all real sex is like porn sex". There is certainly a lot of porn-style sex going on, especially with kids these days having learned about sex from porn.

It's not my real birthday, but not far off. Thanks man!

YOU GO TO KONGREGATE.

In reply to this comment by crillep:
Yes, this video has no place here. Go to kongregate.

What can I say? I relate to the kid.

In reply to this comment by MarineGunrock:
I love how that's still your avatar.

Because the bible offers plenty of reason for evil.

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
What makes it invalid?

In reply to this comment by budzos:
It's an invalid argument against the Christian god, who is really the only widely followed, omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent, singular creator god I can think of.

No, it was an incorrect use of the word. I'm not being emotional when I remind you there's no such thing as atheist dogma. Certitude is not dogma.

Wrong. There is no atheist dogma. Just like there's no dogma for people who don't believe in Santa Claus.

In reply to this comment by Lodurr:
>> ^budzos:
Okay, so you mean dogmatic with a completely OPPOSITE definition of what dogma is. Deceptive, manipulative, word-twisting harpy.


I didn't enjoy the schoolyard antics from either of these kids, but I have to clarify that dogma "is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed." It was a correct use of the word, and a real question for an atheist, if they believe in a hard rule stating that god doesn't exist and if they have any dogmatic rules at all (answer to both would be "no").

This is what happens when you get emotional about an intellectual subject--facts slip away from you. If atheism brings the same emotional BS as religion, what the hell is the point? You're reducing an intellectual movement to angsty counter-culture.

I got kinda bored with the topic. All I'll say is that "eggcorns" are indeed malapropisms, despite what Wikipedia has to say about it.

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
Out of ideas for a quid pro quo?

Wow, great point.

(That was sarcasm)

Regional variants are not malapropisms.

Fail.

EDIT: imho you have a poorly tuned sense for analogies.

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
Oh wow you really seem to know a lot about language. Maybe you can help me with something. I need to refer to a sweetened carbonated beverage but I dont know what to call it. All I have to go by is this map: http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/popvssodamap.gif

Can you help me? Which is correct? As you say, they can't ALL be correct.

Im sorry. For all intensive purposes I could of been more polite. I am a angry guy. And these thing's piss me off because I seen it so much. Fortunately my anger is preserved on you're profile page, for prosperity. I guess if you are happy with fucked up language you could put some whip cream on it and have yourself a fucked language Sunday. You and Westy could join force's and ignore what is correct all together because it seems you could care less irregardless.

The fact that language evolves on a macro scale doesn't mean that the individual contributors to this evolution don't look like morons when their contribution is a life of malapropisms. This is a very sensitive spot with me because I was raised to have an impeccable precision of speech.

Excuse me while I kiss this guy.
/Jimi Hendrix

EDIT: I have had great fun typing this. Have re-edited a couple times to pad out the errors in the first paragraph. I think I will use moron-speak whenever I address you from now on, since you seem to think that nothing is incorrect because language evolves. Maybe it will give me the same buzz Westy seems to get from intentionally typing like a chimpanzee on quaaludes.

It's "right" if you've misheard the correct phrase at some point in your life and are a moron who doesn't parse what he's listening to.

Yes now kids will grow up hearing it wrong, and so from their POV it will be right. That doesn't change the fact that saying "intensive purposes" is EXACTLY the same thing as saying "could of." It makes one seem like a fucking thoughtless moron who is not a good listener and doesn't read.

So by all means, be my guest, and use your fucked up phrasing for "all intensive purposes".

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
It's "right" if the words represent the idea you actually mean to communicate to both parties. It may not be the original phrase but that doesn't really matter in terms of the evolution of a language.

In reply to this comment by budzos:
Jigga, that comment really irks me. "Intensive purposes" is just not right. Feel free to use it though, if you want to sound like an illiterate moron.

Lately I'm utterly horrified by the large percentage of people on Facebook who seem to think you pluralize words with a fucking apostrophe. It seriously has turned me off like five girls I've had a long-standing hard-on for.

Can you un-hobble me or is there some bureaucratic process I have to wait for?

On second thought, after actually looking at the FAQ, I think this is bullshit.

Q 30 (Hobbling)
"unstable members have a meltdown and use their star powers to inflict damage to the site as well as the whole community. In order to cope with this unfortunate possibility, there exists the ability to hobble (or handcuff) an abusive member before they can continue doing damage to the Sift.

Diamond members and above have the ability to instantly hobble any starred (or better) member who is blatantly misusing their abilities."

Q 32 (Comments)
* What can't I say in a comment?

We love a good fiery comment thread, but sometimes they go overboard. Please avoid personal attacks. It's okay to criticize ideas but refrain personal insults. Please avoid blatantly racist speech, threats, or other verbal abuse. This goes for comments in public arenas as well as private member profile comments. If a comment is bad enough it will probably be deleted due to negative feedback. "

It looks to me like I was not abusing my star priveleges to inflict damange on the site or community. I merely posted an inappropriate comment, which should have been deleted if you felt it was so inappropriate.

EXCESSIVE FORCE!

EXCESSIVE FORCE!

In reply to this comment by MarineGunrock:
I really like you man, but that comment was out of line. Sure QM can be the biggest of douche bags, but an open insult like that was too much. Don't take the hobbling too hard, man. It's nothing personal, dude. Things just need to be done for fairness sake, you know?