RationalMadman

It's called a pun.

I never asked to be called 'ratty', I have explicitly made clear I don't consent to it, so here instead of crying about it I decided to make clear that if I'm a ratty and he's 'hunting me down' to toy with me, he's the pussy cat.

If I'm a ratty and you keep chasing me around in every thread I'm in, I guess that makes you a pussy.

Lame insult tbh?

From the millisecond the game begins through to the moment the Round ends, if England gets hold of the ball they taunt the enemy, passing with endless possession gradually and perpetually keeping it on the opponent's side of the pitch. They then close in and bim bam boom they can and will execute a perfect 3-combo shot into goal unless the enemy is well-prepared.

Germany actually had an extremely similar playstyle, that match could easily have gone either way.

Denmark liked to do this: go super aggro at the start, then play defensive and relax part way through the half and ramp things up at the end as the enemy is tired.

The problem is that England had very fit players, they just didn't tire out that easily.

You are a person who unironically thinks Nixon was the best US president and that Fascism is morally good... So, forgive me for taking your stance as a compliment since you believe quite literally the opposite of truth regarding who is good vs bad at what they do.

Not much to congratulate in my opinion, this move is definitely a positive thing for the website though, without a single doubt.

England does side towards aggro though.

I didn't say England is hyperaggro, they are a very strong hybrid team, very balanced and intensely high-pressure. They only possess so much because other teams aren't efficiently tackling them, Denmark and Germany both had styles that could have knocked Italy out of the tournament, Italy scraped by due to extra time and penalties while England took on teams that could and would destroy Italy.

Italy was against teams that specialised in exploiting weak defence and hoarding the ball (Spain, Belgium and Austria)

Kind of interesting I guess...

You could say this about every Republican ever, from day one.

Denmark were amazing, superior to Italy in fact. Denmark had an excellent strategy (start off aggro, then switch to tiring the enemies out then boom boom boom attack relentlessly in a burst after some replacements), in theory this was absolutely optimal and should have defeated England, unfortunately, in practice because England's defense is so good, they couldn't force through a goal and replaced out an extremely cunning striker of theirs (Denmark's) for a more 'fit' one which was a bad move vs England.

Italy only knows how to play defensive, they have no clue how to approach hyperaggro teams. England has taken on and defeated many such teams and is also defensive at the same time.

Italy will lose 2-0, perhaps even 3-0. They struggle when the enemies are extremely prone to combo-brutalise-attacks.

Italy destroys teams that obsess over possession and safe midgame, England doesn't do this, they literally counter superdefensive teams specifically. Wait and see.

I know from gang culture that more often than not the OGs are extremely ruthless types that rewrite history upon securing victory, to paint themselves as heroes. The founding fathers were gangsters without the label.

Nearer to devils than saints for sure.

Dream on

I mean, I have never in my entire life in any culture met someone who refers to a hotdog even indirectly as being part of 'sandwich(es)' so, yeah there's no need to debate this, you're backing the status quo.

Normally I'd ignore you but I am curious what on Earth makes you think everyone is low on my list.

Yassine found a way to insert Sharia propaganda in a thread that... Oh, never mind we have a far-right guy as the OP.

The only problem I can actually see regarding this is that the military splits by gender specifically to avoid sexual activities (they are trying to make you become an extremely focused, disciplined individual).

The problem is that homosexuals (or alternatively transgenders that are heterosexual or bisexual in their transferred gender) can and probably will get intimate at some point.

Other than that, there's no issue.

zedvictor is a user who does nothing else on this website than specifically misinterpret posts by others to troll and trigger them. You must be new to his trolling if you're reacting this strongly, I just block and move on.

That explains nothing...

Tough choice, I may be a progressive but both of them have displayed very perverted behaviour and irresponsible tendencies with handling power. Biden has severe dementia and is lying about it so I can't say I trust him but Trump is a far more sinister and frequent liar.

Both are low as fuck on my list.

Obama is/was literally my favourite president so far, I think he led US incredibly well across the board despite all the BS nitpicking people have with his presidency. He took US that Bush left in shambles and did the absolute best he could so much so that Trump's fucking up of US was too powerless to undo the strong changes Obama had done (especially in terms of affirmative action and helping the poor) such that Trump appeared less bad.

Lincoln was a racist pragmatist who betrayed his racist values for the sake of uniting the US by force and keeping his voter base happy.

He's not even close to the best in my eyes but certainly isn't among the worst. He was mediocre, a guy who had a lot of streetsmarts but very little integrity.

"Honest Abe" couldn't be further from the truth.

Make a separate thread about UK politics and where you believe the Parties stand and I'll oblige you with a more in-depth response.

There is absolutely no way that Lib Dems are the equivalent of your US Libertarian Party, if anything they are on the other polar end of the spectrum.

Imperfection can lead to perfect matches of sorts, I do believe in 'true synergy' more so than 'true love'. For instance the chemistry between Sherlock and Dr. Watson is very viable and a perfect fit. 

This stems from basics of alpha vs beta hierarchy and other things in our species' history. There really are perfect bonds and matches in life, specifically due to imperfections balancing each other out.

Show me a song by Tyler that doesn't make me cringe or feel unpleasant.

Can you show me somebody in real life who loves debating that isn't a toxic person in a fair few ways?

I was no exception to this rule. I probably still am not, I'm working on it.

I think debating is a natural interest and hobby of someone who is very prone to habitually disagree and nitpick at things. I was that guy for a fair amount of my life. I changed how readily I showed it IRL but never changed the core personality and it was only recently that I appreciated how much effort I put into arguing when otherwise agreeing and even faking a polite white-lie-support of something could just so much easier handle the scenario.

If we go through life nonstop arguing it gets addictive, not just because we are good at it but because we feel 'real' amongst a buch of 'fakes'. The problem is that this makes us enemies, nobody likes a skilled debater in real life.  Can you imagine Oromagi, Ragnar and Ramshutu or MisterChris or whoever just arguing the crap out of everyone in their workplace that disagreed with them? Nobody would end up liking them... That's the issue with it.

I have spent so much of my life loving to argue and finally now I realise I basically convinced 0 people of anything...  Okay maybe 2 or 3 but come on, that's at the sake of alienating far more.

What good is it to debate? I even do it with etiquette and that just makes more enemies as then I seem fake about it. I've never once seen positive outcome from a real life application of my debating skills, like literally never. It's only helped me when another similar to me tries to take me on in that way and how rare is that? Like... twice a year someone maybe really, really wants a debate on something with me but that's about it. We live in a world that's still ruled by jungle law, we're just primates wearing suits and ties to hide the reality of it. If you piss off the wrong alpha, it doesn't matter how logical you are, you'll get alienated in that place. That's life and it's irrational, unfair and shit but what I have come to realise and truly appreciate is that what's even more shit than that would be a world where we all argued 24/7... nothing would get done.

I'm starting to wonder if I was wrong about everything, like ever taking part in a community like this and ever liking to argue. It's caused me more issues than I'd like to admit, In hindsight I do believe lost a few real long-term friendships predominantly due to this habit and craving of mine to argue and debate.

I've just learned to shut my mouth when I disagree and think hard of the impact of my disagreement before opening it (my mouth) but that doesn't really settle the unrest in me at the stupidity of what's unfurling in the (to me) childlike disagreement between grown adults that should have a higher capacity to reason than what they convey.

Is that what life is like for you other skilled debaters? I really dislike it but I accept it.

this is like this guy's tenth debate in the DART subforum that has nothing to do with DART.

There's some very strong right wingers who oppose UHC but they're a minority. Almost all of UK truly supports the NHS, even the majority of the right wing.

I'll reply to you later.

For what it's worth, I agree with you that the British Empire was magnificently corrupt and correctly/justly overthrown in essentially all of the places it overtook.

I'm not going to agree that America's world domination campaign is a good thing though.

In Britain and Northern Ireland, a right wing party has to support the NHS if they want to gain votes. They argue that they don't see UHC interfering with people's rights as even the right wingers of UK generally do support the poor getting free healthcare.

It's a decency thing if you ask me, not something to be ashamed of.

Brexit Party are extremely capitalist, they don't support high taxes at all.

Lib dems are left wing indeed, less so than Labour but definitely so compared to America's scale.

Lib Dems support much superior subsidisation for the mentally unwell than NHS currently offers and are even more leftwing than Labour about that.

The Lib Dems are an offshoot from the original leftwing party Labour of UK. They support censoring hate speech to the max as well as other things that aren't what right-wing libertarianism stands for 

Brexit Party is now known as Reform UK

UK's libertarian right wing party is known as Brexit Party or UKIP (different parties with allied members), they do have potentially harder right-wing racist allegiances in their supporters though as the BNP considers them allies.

The Lib Dems are the equivalent of if the Democrats had an offshoot.

Unfettered Capitalism is unmeritocratic nepotism to the hilt where the rich passively snowball a permanent lead and maintain inherited wealth and power within the society perpetually in dynasties. This is still the case here in 2021 in severely Capitalist societies such as Kenya, Nigeria, Argentina, Chile, India and more.

Unfettered Socialism (which becomes brutal Communism) is eventually unmeritocratic nepotism as well but the path towards it is far less straightforward. Instead of the initially earned wealthy and influential passing it down their bloodlines and to friends (which happens in unfettered Capitalism), the cycle of anti-meritocracy in unfettered Socialism begins due to anti-corruption it seems to be. The elite in the society seek to stamp out any and all organisations that can stand in their way, if you rise in the society it cannot be via wealth, since it's socialist, rather it is by knowing the right people (which all answer equally to an untouchable elite 'up top' that run the society). 

Both are toxic, a sensible balance is best.

Spoken like a true citizen of China.

And what almost everyone except you has come to realise is that nobody gives enough of a shit to vote on a debate where there's too much clashing on BS like that which renders all high-effort passionate debates useless but you somehow got votes despite being a complete bore to read, which is the real secret to your victory when we see who consistently voted for you and who you consistently voted for.

Public education is extremely insufficient especially if the intent is to enable those that go through it to genuinely be on equal footing to those that went through private education but even within public education, those that struggle with the regimented way it's taught and examined come to perish in it (as well as those with rougher households).

passionately kiss in public while putting out your arm for a taxi to stop and drive you two away.

sorry, I thought this was a movie

Trump is so racist his orangeness deeply disturbs him every time he looks in the mirror and his scowl strengthens its grip on his facial muscles a littlie more each time.

# is a 'hash' in all versions of English. 

There is absolutely no interaction you have had with me in the forums where your intent isn't to gaslight or undermine my reasons for feeling frustrated at a situation.

You are the one who has no clue what you're talking about. Fauxlaw suddenly goes around typing 'poundmetoo' as a distasteful joke about why I blocked him earlier in the same day he posted this thread.

Kanye's superior in terms of that while both do gimmicky, lame shit, that's Tyler's everything whereas Kanye has versatility.

Kanye has actual bars at times, proper effort in his delivery too, Tyler is lazy in both lyricism and delivery. I'm never ever impressed with a Tyler song/verse