Total posts: 19,931
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
one he brought entirely onto himself. Stop romanticising his bullshit as if it's some innocent bystanding user we went out of our way to brand a witch.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
You do realise how ridiculous your sarcasm is in these scenarios?
You assume that God's standards for creation need to be to save everyone and bring joy to them too. Even the religious make the same error that you do very often.
God doesn't give a shit about our agony, both our pleasure and pain cause interesting scenarios for this entity to sit and watch unfold, that is the only reason we exist with the ability to process pleasure and pain.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
This user is left-wing, the conservatism is part of the parody.
Created:
Posted in:
He could be Type1 but the coincidence with lebronski quitting just as he joined makes me think if he is Type1, Lebronski was too.
He also could be a user that had the username Paper12, who I think knew Lebronski irl and joined this site together with him.
Alternatively, he's Billbatard but the knowledge of rap is what makes me skeptical of that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
In Japan, South Korea and many 'western' social democracies today, you will notice something extremely shocking when you compare it with the general people's body proportions in a nation like the US or the upper class in less developed nations; there are becoming less 'fat' people amongst the wealthy in these nations.Why is that? It is perhaps, if extremely cynical, to do with campaigns and policies of 'taxing sugar' etc that certain governments carried out over recent years to help (according to skeptics who propose this idea) to reduce costs on the socialised or partially-socialised healthcare. If that's true, why don't proponents of this idea support the US doing that then?As in, why don't proponents of the idea that obese people would drain the economy too much if healthcare were socialised, instead support information programs and policies on fast food (the same meal name in Europe is around only 60% as unhealthy as the same meal in the US, I am not exaggerating, this is due to strict EU policy regarding 'how unhealthy a single meal can be' in Europe which is a law that simply doesn't even exist in US), Japan and South Korea also healthier but that is more cultural (if it was purely oily and greasy fast food there, they'd not visit it much as they have much healthier 'fast food' outlets, focused on strips of meat and/or fish with decent amount of vegetables and only easy-to-digest starch formats like rice, etc).If you would observe what a culture can do if it begins to positively (not negatively or abusively) pressure the obese to make healthier life decisions, as one whole society (rather than individuals teasing and having spite for one another) you would see a much more exponential transition towards a healthier populace. You can call it Orwellian, even I was not a fan of the sugar tax (I love sugary treats now and again and am a slim guy myself) but ultimately it's about the 'greater good'.If more people end up less draining on society and happier+healthier, these policies can be optimal for the society. It's all based around that metric. Stop screaming 'freedom' and then going 'oh no not everyone uses their freedom so wisely'. You don't matter enough on your own for your 'good life decisions' to outweigh the bad ones others can/will make without guidelines and restrictions. You're not the only citizen of your nation.
Created:
Posted in:
you are blatantly lebronski, the only difference is this time around you're more of a prick than before. You two share every single stylistic preference/error that is possible to share
Created:
Posted in:
blaming each other doesn't work so well when you're up against the whole world.
Stop the petty shit, work with people you immensely dislike and realise life isn't all about being friends, it's about learning to use your enemies with charisma and negotiation when needed.
The biggest issue that the US has, more than almost any other highly developed nation in 2021 is that it has a habit that only the very least developed nations have; party line rivalries are considered more important than nation-dividing rivalries.
Pretty much every other nation has realised that settling things like caps, sensible public service viability for the poor, structure so that Capitalism can take place securely without running the risk of nepotism and severe poverty causing unfair disparity a few generations down the line (ghettos benefit nobody in the long run) and then debate the serious issues.
For instance, when cops handle a serious situation in non-US highly developed nations and didn't necessarily arrive fast and act swiftly enough to stop the criminal before deaths, the headlines are extremely rarely about 'oh look what a screw up the cops are under this party' (by media supporting the other party), it's much more about ideas to help, rather than party-differences even if those very ideas are things that one campaign had over another. It will be raised again later on in candidate debates but only in the sense of 'we could have handled this better' more than 'you totally screwed up'.
The US is also the only nation I have ever seen that so quickly takes to immature habits like Twitter squabbles and petty oneupmanship. Other highly developed nations play dirty of course, smear campaigning has been around for centuries even before newpapers could easily be bought, word of mouth worked wonders. I am saying that the level to which it happens and lack of asking 'alright in the end Republican Party and Democrat Party should be more united in end-goals than other nation's parties because otherwise why are we even a nation?'
I have yet to see even one US candidate, let alone president, recommend less hostility. Even the Independents advocate for more, not less, hostility down the party lines.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
It's entirely contingent on what reality is at the core.
If reality is a simulation, janesix is correct; if reality is physical, zedvictor4 is correct.
The ultimate question is also, if duality is occurring (that both consciousness and physicality are realms that aren't within but beside each other), then reality may be even more mysterious.
I lean towards Janesix's side of things because from a computing perspective, ignoring the physicality of microchips and motherboards, it is much more viable to simulate 'everything spawning out of nothing with some arbitary laws of physics and chemistry to seem sensible' than it is to first have that reality physically there and then cause concious experience within the simulated characters afterwards.
If simulating a character in fact automatically necessitates consciousness there is something even more disturbing at play because that means every character that suffers in videogames is actually really experiencing said agony.
Created:
Posted in:
What else would I call a guy hiding behind the username 'big pimp daddy'?
Never come across someone with such a username that aint got something they're compensating for and I don't mean size.
Created:
Posted in:
you know, if you keep saying shitlib after each post you make then it's gonna seem like your own signature, right?
Created:
Posted in:
Honestly, of the 'elite figures' Zuckerberg is actually one of the ones I dislike least because he's the most honest of the lot.
He admits when he's caught spying, admits when he screwed up handling data privately and still perserveres despite everyone grappling to drag him through the mud.
Whatever you say about him, the guy is a tough nut to crack. I admire the grit if nothing else.
I also think, based on what I've seen, he's one of the few filthy rich guys I know of that seems to have a genuinely happy personal life with his close relations and/or friends.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BigPimpDaddy
Thank you for letting me know, you're my joy radar. When people are happy hit me up, I'm all about those positive vibes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BigPimpDaddy
This isn't the introduction thread, that's here: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/356-welcome-to-dart-introduce-yourself
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Progressives are generally Social Democrats or soft dem-soc, they are rarely actually socialists who really uphold democratic socialism.
That said, I admit that genuine Democratic Socialists fall under the umbrella of Progressivism. You're pooling together socdems with demsocs, dem-soc is much stricter left-wing and is as certain in its quest for equality of outcome than socdems are with their quest for equality of opportunity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BigPimpDaddy
He said lebron knew how to play with balls
Created:
And the answer is the same reason you didn't? We don't all have that path in life.
Created:
HAHAHAHA THE GUY WAS BORN WITH A SILVER SPOON IN HIS OWN MOUTH, stop spouting nonsense.
Created:
Yes, yes, it was the choice of Bill Gates' offspring to be born to a dad that rich and it was the choice of a starving child in a ghetto to be born there and raised in a rough household where they could barely focus to do their homework and get sufficient sleep and nourishment, let alone what school was like.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MarkWebberFan
but I'd rather talk to Mesmer than be tied up in an ego fight on who has a better reading habit.
I didn't realise these things were mutually exclusive. ;)
Everything with Mesmer is an ego battle, just read between the lines.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
@TheUnderdog
Funny, just 2-3 days ago Ramshutu told Wylted that he'd defend him better than I could and a few days before that made a post about how he appreciated Wylted's role on the site at stirring up activity.
Wylted then backed me for president here regardless and suddenly Ramshutu changed direction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drlebronski
Hmm, better than a lot of old school stuff. Not my type of beat and delivery style but could be far worse. I like it and back in that era would be among my faves for sure, I like the hook.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
I would like to say specifically with the Mesmer ban, as opposed to the present-day Wylted ban that Wylted learned to ease it up with the personal attacks and his biggest 'crime' is hate speech. Mesmer's ban makes it out to be based solely on hate speech and multiaccounting for ban evasion. In actual fact, Mesmer was becoming increasingly personal and vindictive in his/her/their replies to people, going out of their way to refer to what a 'pathetic man' someone was or what a 'little child who has a barely functioning IQ' someone else was. Wylted used to do this very often too and was beginning to as well do it now.
I think they focused on the wrong posts even to show Mesmer's racism and Wylted's hate speech, there were far more directly racist and abusive posts from both than the ones quoted and linked to but I think the bans are correct and proportionate.
I would like to see whiteflame incorporate more staggered, active punishment such as bans specifically from thread creation without banning posts or bans specifically from forum posting without banning debates.
These seem to not be friendly technologically for Michael to enforce but the enforcement can be a temporary ban from the website if the person disobeys the 'mute'.
Created:
Posted in:
I thought this was about roasting you, pretty passive-aggressive way to stay salty about something.
I'm not even slightly hurt by that comment. You say you hate to read it, yet you read it every time, every word.
At least I don't come back whenever you grab my attention. That's called obsession.
In the future, if you want to insult people, don't make a thread specifically saying it's only about insulting you and then go out of your way to insult everybody that posted in it. It just makes you seem petty af.
Created:
-->
@Castin
So head mod on DART is like the Defense Against the Dark Arts job at Hogwarts.
Nice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dfss9788
what exactly are you suggesting with 'superior culture'? Just because more of your ethnicity end up as high paid white-collar workers doesn't mean that the blue collar culture is inferior, it's actually complimentary.
A huge error even many egalitarians make is to aim for pure equality in outcome (yes, I agree with the right-wing on this). Not everybody wants to be an accountant, doctor, lawyer, media mogul etc. Some really are happy with simpler lines of work or alternatively more creative lines of work.
There are not superior cultures if you're measuring it on the tendency of them to end up that way. A society can't function if everyone is wired and raised to be a managerial and/or executive type role. It will fall apart, even when artificial intelligence eventually can do most manual labour tasks, there still will be differentiation. It's also why I have particular issue with people who measure actors' and musicians' success by awards attained etc.
An underground rapper or extremely niche director of a strange genre is never, ever no matter how talented going to garner the same results in trophies and such as a mainstream blockbuster type. Their league, to some, is 'way above' but is enriched in a very different way.
Linux operating system developers and DuckDuckGo search engine know they're never beating Microsoft, Apple and Google at the numbers game. It's not about wealth and popularity, it's about quality and satisfaction. I reckon Mark Zuckerberg, stone-cold expression and lawsuits aside, is ultimately extremely proud of what he's done with Facebook. I don't deny that the mainstream successes can relish in their success but I also believe that a less popular socialising IM platform that came and went was beautiful in its own right.
I don't get people who always need to compete on sheer results, it's also why 'rating' on this website will never mean as much to me as frequency of entertaining debates and why I'll even forfeit regularly if I find them unsatisfactory. What you do with your life has so many variables, I don't get this 'superior' or 'inferior' thing. Sure, I get it, if someone has absolutely no skills, job etc you want to push them but beyond that I don't like judgemental parenting or society. I find it tends to be toxic more than motivating.
Created:
Posted in:
not just having more, remember that frequency of reproduction is only one side of NS.
longevity of the offspring and the tendency of said offspring to also reproduce a lot are the further elements of it.
Created:
Posted in:
Is there a valid basis for Anti-Semitism?
No, there isn't.
To answer a different question that you've asked in this thread,
why do you think that the success is inspite of victimization
Natural selection (both in terms of habits in how they raised children and perhaps certain dispositions) is quite literally the reason that there certainly has been a reality that the most tough (primarily) and quick-witted (secondarily) survived the several persecutions of their ethnicity.
Due to the persecution, not only being fast-thinking is selected in favour of but being 'tough and loyal' in themselves are. If you don't help out others in effective 'tit for tat' trades, you would over time end up isolated and easily persecuted (perhaps violently or at least financially in a glass ceiling for your career prospects).
Do note, however, that quality of childhood mental stimulation and emphasis on education are present in Jewish culture. The reason a persecuted ethnicity may end up underperforming tends to be a combination of lack of opportunity meeting lack of education, this tends to lead to children who have lack of nutrition for brain development and lack of external stimuli to make them want to push their intellect, as opposed to their athleticism or 'grit'.
It's the 'toughness' that always is primarily selected in favour of with the persecuted, you will find they're consistently extremely tough characters mentally many generations down the line because you had to be to survive, if you were unfortunate enough to have a disposition towards depression and anxiety and it crippled your performance and stamina, you either ended up dead or totally pushed to deep poverty.
What you can say 'toughness' is is perhaps the tendency to react to a situation of distress with ire, as opposed to sadness or anxiety. Those that found hardship very motivating and are the type of people whose genes and minds led to them being motivated to 'avoid negative outcome' more than 'seek positive outcome' probably found life more bearable and reproduced, raised tough children etc. Those that were sensitive, responded more to motivation based on 'seeking positive outcome' or approached anxiety with a 'let's chill out' approach tended to remain single or have an only child and invest entirely in them, just due to the stress and way their personality type didn't end up able to flourish given the circumstances.
I read this post over several times to make sure I carefully worded each part to not get twisted to make me seem in any shape or form racist or bigoted. If anyone feels offended personally, feel free to let me know why. I am trying to explain in a 100% non-bigoted way how and why a persecuted ethnicity ends up particularly resourceful more often than not, if given the opportunity to.
Created:
Posted in:
That rap battle was a rhyme scheme and pun masterpiece from me. It lacked a bit in flow and content but at that time there wasn't as much to diss on Ramshutu and if I dug in to him, he had more to diss on me so I had to stick to flexing style and hope the voters liked it.
I'd roast him like a meatloaf but he's just sweet potato with no beef anymore.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
If he believed what he wrote in the 'crap shoot' section, he wouldn't be doing what he admits in the first sentence. Very simple to understand.
If he is taking it, why is he being so pedantic about supporting it?
I don't even side with making it mandatory, I just don't like the arguments 'it has no guaranteed benefit' which he quickly backpeddled on. I tis guaranteed to benefit, sometimes the severe side effects get in the way, extremely rarely. It's a crap shoot to try and get the side effects.
What is true is we don't know if there's lingering side effects further down the line.
Created:
-->
@949havoc
A lot of people against vaccination on Covid think it's only about stopping deaths. The actual suffering and time needed to rest off work is severe even for the healthy, it's a complete roulette gamble how severe one's particular set of genes and health will be vs Covid virus, the difference between the very symptomatic with long-standing fatigue (months beyond having the onset of Covid) and the type who are asymptomatic is not really about age, there's healthy 23 year-olds suffering severely from Covid unable to take a long walk without severe cramps and rapid breathing occurring, months after having the onset of it because it has some kind of permanent deterioation effect to certain people and it isn't clear how or why that's decided.
The vaccine secures you as having shallow symptoms vs what you'd otherwise have if you get infected.
Created:
Posted in:
I am not interested in joining in either 'side' of this dispute because the very dynamic of the 'fight' is wrong.
I believe that extreme views which have severely negative impact should indeed be banned to be genuinely advocated for (so only ever allowed in a formal debate as an experiment, if not too vulgar and disclaimed being devil's advocate).
What I also think is that it's true that the rules at the moment are too vague, I would unabashedly support making crystal clear which things are too taboo to be debated for and which are not. Therefore, it is clear that already I am on both/neither side of this dispute.
The last thing I notice is that the flaw of speed (being too slow) was also there with Bsh1's era early on in the website's development. When mods are too inactive and punish in huge bursts after the fact, many issues occur because the way wrongdoers respond to discipline is far more positive the more gradual and immediate you discipline them. If you keep going 'okay you did x y z and now is a big bad punishment for it all' you create a very negative response in the subconscious of the toxic member. If you instead had been gentler and more gradual with the discipline, making clear to them every step of the way what they're doing wrong and what specifically will happen if their behaviour worsens and/or continues without improvement, you then will see the user either improve or sometimes prove to everyone just how significantly toxic they really are since they may act so severely in the opposite direction that it then lets you as a mod prove how undeniably worthwhile it is to ban them before doing so.
I am not going to pretend I think it's okay what Wylted's posted (except for the thread calling me a dick, that's just ridiculous especially on a site with such a small userbase that's not worth getting worked up over, I wasn't even slightly offended since it was actually a compliment). I think he has been toxic and needs consistent guidance on specifically what is and isn't taboo.
If he then chooses, of his own volition, to very specifically make threads and posts that violate the limits on anti-semitism, racism of other variations, support of jihadism, so on and so forth, then you should discipline him and make clear how long he refused to obey the rules.
What the mods are doing wrong here isn't what some are saying, in my eyes. There's not one fucking place of any decent standing on the entire Internet that would allow the kind of views Wylted has been saying, the difference is they make that stance crystal clear in their rules. The only difference here is the fact this website happens to be dedicated to debating, it makes some users feel that makes this a wild west anarchic zone independent of the decency standards and general rules other forums and discussion websites all adhere to (except sites that are so bad you'd never want to visit them because of how extreme that stuff on them is, such as 4chan).
You can't effectively carry out discipline if you only do it once every few weeks in such big moves.
Created:
-->
@MisterChris
what a stupid rule.
Created:
All jokes and accusations aside, this is the real reason you don't put an 18 year old in charge of demanding tasks on a website. Their life is just starting to get busier than it ever was before.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
East Asians have upbringings that heavily favour calculation-type intelligence over creative or social intelligence. There is a reason why even as powerful as China is, it's still a 'quiet guy in the corner' of the world on a social level, it easily could be competing with the US if it wanted to, it's about the culture not valuing EQ that much at all.
East Asian cultures value emotional matters less than Western modernised cultures do and it has its drawbacks, especially on suicide rate and actually I'd argue it has no net-benefit at all because while there's much more pressure to be high-achieving, those wired for a more ordinary lifestyle than a high-flying doctor or engineer or lawyer or whatever end up trampled by the society, brutally so. It's unforgiving to those that suffer in any way, especially the Chinese culture in particular. They don't believe empathy is an important trait at all, this is because in Confucianism duty and loyalty to your family comes before anything emotional on the moral spectrum and that is a significant philosophy that has influence China's culture today.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
You can, severely so, based on how hard you focused on brain-stimulating activity in childhood and adolescence as well as even young adulthood.
By around 26-27 a male finalises their IQ whereas at around 22-23 a female has generally finalised hers (brains develop slower than the bodies imply puberty ends, there's actually a neurological argument for a higher age of consent for males than females but that will of course be too controversial to ever be enacted and as a male myself I'd fight it).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
This is strongly part of my own 'physical philosophy' outlook.
I believe that there's a duality at the core of reality.
the original entity that created is random but it randomly created another entity capable of controlling it. That controller chose to leave some things random as reality was too boring to leave totally predictable and controlled, that's why there's randomness the further 'zoomed in' our reality structure is but much more consistent laws of physics, chemistry and biology the more 'zoomed out' our reality is.
Created:
I just wanted this known. Idk who reported it. I didn't know he'd be that vulgar but I didn't report for the sake of it.
I appreciated the support.
Created: