Total posts: 3,556
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Heh, I just achieved.You have earned a new silver medal «People's Voice»
Just in time, congratulations.
Created:
Posted in:
You will notice that the member who launched this string is neither the owner of the site, nor a mod, nor the president of the site. Don't you think such information should come from one of them?
They were just repeating information from the official notification (Click on the green megaphone icon), David posted it as follows:
Dooms day is upon us!
Hello all,
This is a reminder to join our discord server found here: https://discord.gg/E6wJhdH8xS. Unless a miracle happens and Mike renews this website domain, the domain for this website expires at 1450 UTC (a little more than 12 hours from now). Please join our discord channel for news, updates, and to stay in touch. We are working on a brand new debate website, DebateCraft. The site is not functional yet but should be within the next few weeks.
Thank you for the memories and fun of debateart.com
See you on discord!
This is a reminder to join our discord server found here: https://discord.gg/E6wJhdH8xS. Unless a miracle happens and Mike renews this website domain, the domain for this website expires at 1450 UTC (a little more than 12 hours from now). Please join our discord channel for news, updates, and to stay in touch. We are working on a brand new debate website, DebateCraft. The site is not functional yet but should be within the next few weeks.
Thank you for the memories and fun of debateart.com
See you on discord!
07.15.2025 08:21PM
Published by@David
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Most people of any demographic won't "start swinging" including black people.How about this. You call 10 black people nigger to their face. The next 10 you see and tell me how many punch you. I will call the next ten Asians I see gooks and I will report the results. Sound fair?
Sounds like a trailer trash redneck to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
I don't know why but Youtube recommended me some videos of blacks beating the shit out of white racists when they throw this unspeakable word that everyone in this forum is afraid of saying, except Wylted of course. You know, this word that starts with "NI" and ends with "ER", or "A", depending on what accent you prefer to say it.
The YouTube algorithm primarily looks at your viewing behavior and assesses engagement metrics to personalize recommendations for you. You are getting this kind of video recommendations because of what you are searching for and spend time watching, based on that kind of engagement metrics the algorithm is predicting what you probably want to see.
I think nothing justifies violence.
It's all about context, and the fact is, you don't really know how you would react to most contexts, I'm sure there are plenty situations in which you would become violent. I am even certain that if I knew enough about you, I could get you to take a swing at me just using words, there's a context in which that happens whether you think so or not. By the way, you don't get to "think" what "justifies violence" ahead of time, considerations about "justified" always come after the fact, justified or not is a matter of hindsight.
I see a lot of comments encouraging people to beat racists but I guess this is worse because you can also go to jail for injuring people. To me, beating is not the same as offending verbally, no matter the words you use. I can get really pissed off if you find the words that gets me, but I'm not going to beat you for that. I guess it's the same with the N-word, whatever the historical load it has, it's stupid to get mad at it.
There are ae a lot of different groups, websites, agendas, divisions, hatreds, bigots, etc... the world is a fucking freak show, many are advocating violence, many solicit it, and learning how to push another group's buttons has become a sport (on the internet, and in the real world). I'd say the majority of posters here are just trying to make others angry, it's like a hobby for people with way too much time on their hands.
Do you think the N-word is overestimated? It's a racial slur but if black people get aggressive with it, there could be a problem of self-esteem.
Still about context, the history of the word makes it emotionally charged, who says it, and who hears it atters, their personal history will determine the nature of their response. The "N" word is often used specifically to invoke violence, if that is its intent, then neither side is innocent of wrongdoing, violence is transactional, both are willing to participate.
Words matter, we have seen a dramatic degradation in political rhetoric and discourse, and a direct result of those words is a sharp increase in thuggish force, and violence.
Created:
-->
@Allah
The only way to change username is by self ban and make another account.
You can't cancel your account? OK, then it makes sense I guess, never seen a site where you can't quit once you sign up, seems kind of nefarious or something. They should put a warning up "If you sign up, it's for fucking ever".
I'm not sure how I feel about this.
Of course, from what I've been reading, forever might only be two days.
Created:
-->
@Allah
one day wakes up as big bug
I hate it when that happens.
Created:
-->
@Savant
Is this what you mean by mention you in a comment, Savant
Created:
-->
@FLRW
@Sir.Lancelot
AR was banned at his request.
That "banned at his request" thing is kind of popular here, what is the point of it exactly.
I mean, if you don't want to post, what's wrong with just don't post.
Is it just for drama's sake? To be able to come back under another name? Is it just one more weird thing on this weird site?
Splain Ricky. If you don't know, make something up, I'm curious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Germans like to slap their thighs, eat sausages and drink beer.And then there's Rammstein.
And they like musicals.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Germans like to slap their thighs, eat sausages and drink beer.
Different music altogether.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Why do you hate Cardi B ?
German's hate hip hop because it's hard to march to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@JoeBob
free education for all? if not, just sell one of the planes to cover your and others education, then use the rest for whatever floats your boat
You need to really love what floats your boat, the F22 costs around $70K an hour to fly, plus, I'm pretty sure you need a pilot's license.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Not a fan of Bobby Fischer?
Not a fan, character matters and Fischer had almost no redeeming qualities except that he was a great chess player, but Kasparov was better.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
That wasn't about Garry Kasparov.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Thats a good plan, there's only around 10^120 different chess moves to evaluate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
I kind of doubt that most Christians self-identify as agnostic.
No doubt you are correct about that, but certainty is rare, if you discuss on that level, I think most will admit that they lack certainty, I suspect same goes with most atheists.
Created:
-->
@Mharman
The rules are the rules because the rules are the rules.
Wow, how profound, are you sure?
Don’t question anything you chud! Lol.
That's a good rule of thumb for sheeple.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Does this make him an agnostic Christian? Idk. I guess? Can one be an agnostic Christian. I mean, why not?
I think most Christians are agnostic Christians, it is a matter of faith, you don't get to be certain.
The Christian belief if the God transcends human understanding, the Bible says, "No man knows as he ought to know".
Fundamentally, I think agnostic is the standard Christian position on the matter.
Created:
-->
@Umbrellacorp
For sidewalker:Saying the laws of thermodynamics are incomplete or invoking einstein or self reflective consciousness just lets me understand that you are either some deepak chopra fan or do not know anything about science.
LOL, that's an arrogant typical poser answer
Tell you what, you can pick the science subject, and I will walk all over you in a debate dumbass.
You are just rebutting without making sense.
No, I’m rebutting with logic and actual knowledge about the subject matter, but I may as well be trying to play chess with a cat because you don’t understand the first thing about the subject matter.
Of course all matter tends toward higher entropy. That is a well known law of thermodynamics. You cannot changer that.
No shit Sherlock, you Googled the word entropy, good for you, to bad you don’t understand what you read. Higher entropy means less organization, less complexity, less structure. Try to grasp that because it’s important, say it multiple times till you comprehend it, HIGHER Entropy is LESS complexity, organization, and structure. Memorize, grasp, comprehend, you know, try not to look like a complete idiot.
Evolution does not tell us to look at anything. Evolution just happens. We study it.
LOL, typical puerile answer, maybe you studied it in middle school kiddie, but you haven’t got a clue about what you are talking about.
I did not say anything about evolution.
My God, you don’t even know what subject you are talking about?
Maybe you didn't say anything “coherent” about evolution, but you did blather nonsense about abiogenesis, particularly the crucial evolutionary step from matter to life, and that can only be understood in the context of evolution. Abiogenesis involved a series of steps that include the formation of a habitable planet, the synthesis of organic molecules, and the development of self-replicating and self-assembling structures. It is a critical step in the process of evolution. If you don’t even understand that you are talking about evolution, then you are completely clueless.
I was talking about the emergence of life.
LOL, oh, and the emergence of life has nothing to do with evolution, you are just adorable kiddie. The way you combine arrogance and cluelessness is fucking comical.
I am glad this topic attracts people, but making just using jargon does not make your rebutals right. You need to understand that it is not the laws of thermodynamics to be challenged; but rather the theory itself.
It’s not even a theory, it’s just a stupid statement that demonstrates a total lack of comprehension about the subject matter.
Let me try to dumb it down far enough for you to understand, try to pay attention little kitty, it really isn’t that hard to comprehend.
Entropy is a measure of the degree of disorder or randomness in the system., maximum entropy would be a state of total disorganization or complete randomness.
The creation of life, from non-living chemicals was a matter of the chemical ingredients spontaneously assembling themselves into an astoundingly more complex and more organized assembly of matter that become wrapped in a membrane and had the ability to self-replicate.
For the creation of life from nonliving material to happen, simple chemical precursors, combined to form much more complex polymers like DNA, RNA, and proteins, which are the building blocks of life. These chemical ingredients spontaneously assembled themselves into an astoundingly more complex and much more highly organized assembly of matter that became a self-replicating nucleic acid that was somehow wrapped in a membrane.
It was a physical transition that required a staggering increase in organization and complexity, which, by definition, is a REDUCTION in Entropy. Your hopelessly uninformed assertion that life could have resulted from the maximization of Entropy is about as wrong as any assertion could be. The truth of the matter is the OPPOSITE of your contention.
I am not going to reply to your every sentence.
Of course not, you can’t respond to something you don’t understand.
Here is the theory again:Life causes earth to waste more of sun's energy. That, in the long run, translates to higher entropy.Life does not cause earth to waste more of the suns energy, that is just a stupid statement.The theory says: life may be nothing but the laws of thermodynamics driving this system(earth) towards a higher entropy state. We call it life. Someone calls it self reflective consciousness. That to me does not matter.I was talking about how it could have emerged.If you do not agree then okay. Please give me some counterarguments. Go study the theory and then come back. Your arguments which challenge the laws of thermodynamics do not stand. They are well known and tested laws.
LOL, I don’t need to go study anything to recognize that you are blathering pure, uninformed nonsense. You just need to go Google the word entropy again; you really shouldn’t propose theories about abiogenesis and entropy with having a clue about either one.
Years ago, I read an article in Psychology Today that is explanatory, it was about a study of how arrogance and incompetence are related. I always thought that incompetent people use arrogance to hide their incompetence, but the article pointed out that it’s the other way around, it’s the arrogance that makes people incompetent. Competence comes from learning from other, arrogant people don’t learn because their feelings of superiority make them unable to learn from others, so they remain incompetent. You exemplify that idea, you proposed a theory that is simply incorrect, you are confused about what higher entropy means, so I explained the error. You don’t know shit about me, and yet, you responded with a bunch of bullshit about I’m inferior and you are superior, you understand science and I don’t, you never got past your arrogance to even try to understand your mistake, all you could think of is “who are you to be correcting me”. You are so immersed in your arrogance that you haven’t even considered what I pointed out as your mistake. This demonstrates how you are too arrogant to learn anything, you are clueless, you don’t understand what you are talking about, in short, you are stupid and uninformed, and because you are arrogant, you will always be stupid and uninformed. Because you are arrogant, you don’t understand abiogenesis or entropy, and because you are arrogant, you never will.
Created:
-->
@Umbrellacorp
Yes, just as anybody with even a cursory understanding of physics knows that, when he refuted Newtonian physics, he completely revolutionized the field.It's how science progresses.I don't know who that anybody is. Einstein did discover general relativity. He made some newtonian laws more general in the universal sense than they currently were.He did not refute them, because if he did then we would have been taught the einstein laws of motion at school and not newton's.
I said the 2nd Law of Thermodynamixs is incomplete, you are the one that called that "refuting physics", Einstein said Newtonian physics was incomplete, according to you then, he refuted the laws of physics.
Pay attention.
Created:
-->
@Umbrellacorp
Are you serious that einstein got a lot of mileage out of refuting the laws of physics?
Yes, just as anybody with even a cursory understanding of physics knows that, when he refuted Newtonian physics, he completely revolutionized the field.
It's how science progresses.
Created:
-->
@Umbrellacorp
Sifting order from randomness – from the very beginning, this has been the driving force of life, organizing haphazard collections of molecules and cells into these creatures with their sciences and faiths.That is correct. Order from ramdomness. The problem is to find out how did order emerge from randomness. That is to be studied. I posted a theory that was interesting. Of course there are other theories even more interesting.And refuting the laws of physics takes us nowhere
Maybe it gets you nowhere, at least nowhere past middleschool, but I think Copernicus, Kepler, Lavoisier, Maxwell, Tesla, Einstein,Bohr and a lot of others got a lot of mileage out of it.
Created:
Your conduct towards me when I was a mod implies you are faking accepting that it is undemocratic.
Just because I accept moderation should be undemocratic, doesn't mean I think we should give totalitarian control to a whack job asshole.
Created:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
I really don't understand this idea everyone seems to have that moderation should be a democratic process,The site culture encourages these conversations. There’s always room for discussion on a debate site about moderator decisions.Anyone who believes mods should be immune to criticism are on the wrong platform.And when bans on users are publicized, they are subject to scrutiny.If the mods banned you and gave a fake reason, I am likewise justified in starting a thread and speaking on your behalf. (This is just an example. A hypothetical)
So banned speech isn't really a thing here.
Inappropriate posts should not be deleted because then everyone doesn't get to read it, they can't deny our right to impropriate posts, and we can't deny those who want to do inappropriate posts their right to have those posts read.
Got it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
That way, Racists, Pedophiles, Haters, and the AntisemiticNot all pedophiles are racist.
Of course not, but we don't want to exclude any toxicity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I've heard those turned really toxic...
Cmon Barney, if it turns really toxic, you just have everyone read it and vote on its toxicity, and then have another debate, and if that debate turns toxic, we vote and debate again, and if that gets toxic, repeat...
The important thing is we feature banned speech and make sure everyone reads it. Instead of banning inappropriate posts, we make the site about inappropriate posts. Maybe add an inappropriate post rating system, we could even give a most toxic prize.
We could rename the site, AllToxicAllTheTime.com maybe, or RacistsRUs.com, or ToxicDebates.com, something like that.
As long as everyone knows, if you want banned and toxic posts, this is the place to come.
That way, Racists, Pedophiles, Haters, and the Antisemitic have a place where their posts get maximum exposure, and we benefit from all the increased membership that will bring.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
I hope intelligent alien life is looking at these posts.
Intelligent life certainly isn't writing these posts.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
I doubt any live close enough where they can offer to let you suck them off so don't bother with the pleasentries
I was hoping they would let me be a racist, antisemitic asshole on here and....oh wait, that wasn't me, that was you.
Never mind.
Created:
-->
@David
I'm voting NO to Proposition 1, abstaining on all the others, and would like to add a Proposition 5.
Proposition 5: Moderators should not have to defend themselves, and instead, should just tell everyone to fuck off if they don't like the way it's being done.
I vote yes to Proposition 5.
Created:
-->
@Mharman
We can’t even see what it is he said that was so repugnant, because you deleted it all.
Yeah, that's the whole point, he posted repugnant hate speech, we don't want or allow repugnant hate speech here, so he was banned, and the hate speech was removed, pretty straightforward, I think.
I take this as a sign you want to hide what was said from those who may speak in the banned’s defense. Why are you afraid of accountability?
What the hell don't you get, hate speech is not allowed, someone put hate speech on the boards, and it was deleted, that's the appropriate response, it isn't about you.
This is complete bullshit and I think you know that the site won’t stand for this- which is why it seems, you plan on wiping everything anytime you do this.
I really don't understand this idea everyone seems to have that moderation should be a democratic process, and we are talking about an account that existed for one day, was banned for hate speech, and the hate speech was removed. Saying it shouldn't have been removed is effectively the same as saying hate speech should be allowed on the site because you have the right to read it, no you don't, it's banned on this site. If you feel you have the right to read hate speech, there are web sites specifically for that, you can go to one of those sights and read hate speech all day long if you want, and you can judge it, evaluate it, rate it, grade it, whatever, but you just don't have that right/option here. If you want to read hate speech here, you are out of luck because hate speech is not allowed here, it's not really such a complicated concept.
I'm not just picking on Mharman btw, to everybody bitching about this, if you wanted to control the site you should have come forward when they were looking for somebody to take it over, but nobody wanted the responsibility, and nobody wanted to do the work. Now it seems everybody wants the authority without the responsibility, but that's just not how the word works.
I would rather suck on a boil than manage this site or be a mod, and since that's the case, I don't think I should have any right to scrutinize how those who did accept responsibility do the job.
The banned poster was here one day, he only posted hate speech and got banned for it, now everybody wants to run to his defense like they miss him, or they have lost a friend and a valuable contributor, nonsense, i really don't think it's reasonable to think moderators need your approval.
Everybody should just get the fuck over it.
Created:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
All christians denounce paganism as heresy
Most, but not all.
Created:
-->
@Umbrellacorp
No, it doesn’t.Yes it does. The universe and everything in it is driving towards a higher entropy state. the sun will run out of energy some day.
No shit, but that is a non-sequitur, "No it Doesn't" was in response to your statement "In the long run, life increases earth's overall entropy.", life does not increase Earth's Entropy,
Why on earth would the existence of life result in greaterentropy in the end? Your ideas about therole life plays in the physical process of entropy make no sense at all.It is not my idea, it is a theory i found interesting. the existence of life makes earth absorb more energy from the sun. in the distant future,
Where did you read that nonsense?
When all the energy on earth has spread out in the universe, the earth will have let out more energy than it would have let out without life. Because life absorbs more energy from the sun. Causing the total energy absorbed from earth to increase. When earth decays, it will let out all this energy.
Did you go to Trump University?
Nope, that isn’t what “higher entropy states” means, itmeans the opposite, greater disorder and the deterioration of complexity in a physicalstate. The second law does nothing whatsoever to explain the emergence ofcomplex chemicals and organic molecules that became the building blocks oflife. The process of “emergence ofaminoacids and other DNA/RNA components “ progressed in direct violation of the2nd law of thermodynamics, they represent an increase in order andcomplexity, violating the expected statistical trend towards greater EntropyThe link i provided was not about entropy. did you even read it?
Yes, I know a lot about Miller-Urey, it was more than 70 years ago, and they had the initial conditions wrong, but the theory was valid, and the experiment has been done a hundred times now, we know for a fact that the complex molecules that combined to become life could have occurred naturally.
i meant the molecules that form in those conditions (which are explained in the link) might come together as a way of driving towards a higher entropy state.
There, you did it again, saying higher entropy in place of lower entropy. The experiments show an increase in organization and complexity in direct violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
They are not forming life. they are just obeying the laws of thermodynamics. life emerges as a consequence. the second law does not state anything about life. but molecules obey that law. and when transitioning toward higher energy states, they might have given rise to life as we know it. because life is a waste of energy.
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Please translate the bolded statement, say what?
.You want to be a little moreexplicit about this preposterous statement, explain how we can be considered an“instrument to increase earth's total entropy”. This I want to see.Of course it means nothing. it was meant in a figurative way. i did not mean to say that that is our purpose or any religious thing you might think.I just shared this theory for fun. It is not proven to be true. it is interesting to think about if you are familiar with physics. of course there are other more logical theories to the emergence of life provided by biology. But this one can be countered with more than just religious arguments.
The science of Thermodynamics was developed in response to James Watt’s improvements to the steam engine in the 1700s, it’s about energy, heat, and work, and their interconversion. It’s an applied science, used by engineers to make things, and it’s dated. You are trying to use it where it doesn’t really fit, you are applying it theoretically and ignoring the observations. Used that way, it is not explanatory, instead, it serves as an obstacle to understanding abiogenesis and the evolution of life.
Here's the problem, Einstein showed us that matter and energy are different forms of the same thing, consequently, Kelvin's first law needs to be modified into a broader conceptual scheme regarding the conservation of energy/matter, and the 2nd Law of Entropy. We aren't just talking about the distribution of heat and random motion anymore and we clearly have to redefine the definition of disorder. The second law does not take into account the observed fact that natural form building activities are occurring over time. Self-integrated units of matter are in fact observed opposing the predicted statistical trend toward randomness. Manmade systems impose shape and order from outside, and they break down, entropy applies there. But there are naturally forming units of matter, the hydrogen atom, ice crystals, protein molecules, and the biggie, life, are units whose form is organized within. They all show a tendency to protect themselves from dissolution and repair themselves from within when they have been disturbed or damaged. we are observing a universe in which entities of matter are increasing form and complexity in space and time, and they are defying the second law.
Let's take a simple example from the bottom of the chain, so to speak; it's true that heat is dissipating from the sun, so we can postulate the increase in order and complexity on earth results from the net increase in energy. But there is also a corresponding increase in order occurring in the sun by the very process that generates the heat. In the sun, we have a spontaneous reaction, four hydrogen atoms combine to create one helium atom, add up the total matter and it's slightly less, the excess matter was released in the form of heat, that's where the heat coming from the sun came from. But the resultant helium atom is a much more complex assembly, it is a whole that is more than the sum of its parts, it's more stable, it will in fact recover it's form when damaged, and it possesses new "potentials". This potential resulting from the increase in order also begins a chain of events of further increasing order and form, resulting in oxygen, carbon, iron, amino acids, nucleoproteins, and biological systems, life, and lately, man. At the end of the chain, biological systems certainly appear to operate under a different set of laws; life pretty much has to be considered a special case. The second law just does not take into consideration the increase in order that occurs at the bottom of the sun's dissipation of heat to the earth equation. It doesn't assign any value to the corresponding increase in order, or the higher levels of complexity achieved, and Einstein's theory necessitates that it must. The second law is incomplete if it is seen in the terms of mere heat exchange any longer. In the universe's field or aspect of energy, heat is released or dissipated from the sun, in its aspect of matter, there is a corresponding process of synthesis, four atoms of hydrogen becoming one atom of helium, and it is an increase in complexity that the second law does not recognize.
We need to recognize that the laws of Thermodynamics are incomplete, Evolution doesn't tell us we have to reconsider life; it tells us we have to reconsider matter itself. Seen in its entirety, seen the way evolution demands that we see it; there is a direction to life, towards greater complexity and higher forms of sentience, from inanimate matter, to life, to sentience, to thought, to self-reflective consciousness.
Sifting order from randomness – from the very beginning, this has been the driving force of life, organizing haphazard collections of molecules and cells into these creatures with their sciences and faiths.
Created:
-->
@Umbrellacorp
In the long run, life increases earth's overall entropy.
No, it doesn’t. Entropyapplies to closed systems, and Earth is not a closed system, Entropy isdecreasing on earth because the sun is adding energy, Life represents a manifestationof this decrease in entropy, with a resultant increase in complexity, Heat from the sun causes a net increasein energy on earth that results in an increase in order and complexity. Life DOESNOT “increase Earth’s overall entropy”
Even though life might cause earth to carry energy for a longer time, in the end, the total entropy of our planet will be greater.
Why on earth would the existence of life result in greaterentropy in the end? Your ideas about therole life plays in the physical process of entropy make no sense at all.
Considering early earth had all the conditions and complexity for the emergence of aminoacids and other DNA/RNA components (Proven by experiments).Systems tend toward higher entropy states (One of the fundamental laws of thermodynamics). That might explain the forementioned.Most famous experiment:
Nope, that isn’t what “higher entropy states” means, itmeans the opposite, greater disorder and the deterioration of complexity in a physicalstate. The second law does nothing whatsoever to explain the emergence ofcomplex chemicals and organic molecules that became the building blocks oflife. The process of “emergence ofaminoacids and other DNA/RNA components “ progressed in direct violation of the2nd law of thermodynamics, they represent an increase in order andcomplexity, violating the expected statistical trend towards greater Entropy
We might be nothing but an instrument to increase earth's total entropy.
.You want to be a little moreexplicit about this preposterous statement, explain how we can be considered an“instrument to increase earth's total entropy”. This I want to see.
Created:
The website is not about me. It is about respectful debate.
Bullshit.
The OP asked for a respectful debate, you said no, not until you appease me lol.
It's not about debate; it's about your ego; you always make it about you.
Created:
-->
@Mikal
Ratman wants totalitarian control to make the site about him.
That is just a fact of his deranged reality, it is not debatable.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
I say that no it won't be.
I pray it won't be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Guns won't stop the violence; only more racism can stop the violence.While killing all blacks while solve 50% of all violent crime according to FBI statistics, you will never get voters to agree to do it
MAGA gives a fuck about voters now? When did that change?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
MAGA Snowflakes get bunged up over the pettiest shit, a 82-year-old comedienne made a joke, oh boo hoo hoo, we should overthrow democracy.
I think the Joy Behar scandal could be even bigger than the great Mr. Potatohead Travesty, maybe even worse than the civilization ending Michelle Obama showed her arms.
The horror, the horror.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
In a gun-saturated culture, especially in places with loose carry laws, every confrontation carries the implicit threat of violence. People avoid honest confrontations, social correction, or speaking truth to power—not because they’re cowards, but because they’re calculating survival. This creates a chilling effect: not from government, but from your neighbors. Funny how people scream ‘muh free speech’ but you can’t even honk at someone without worrying they’ll shoot you. That’s not freedom—that’s hostage culture
Guns won't stop the violence; only more racism can stop the violence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." - Mark Twain
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
LOL, if you think Leshwanda was not a troll, then you should be glad you can't be banned for being stupid.You call me stupid, but you overestimate me.
If you think you can convince us that Lashwanda was a noble Black Woman, then you are calling us stupid.
Almost as inane as Wylted's genius argument that mass shootings occur because there's not enough racism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Aren’t Lashwnda and Wylted the same person?
Of course they are. It violated the COC in both inbeing the "worst form of trolling,,,posting irrelevant or inflammatory content" AND "impersonation (pretending to be someone else).
"We do not permit the worst forms of trolling, such as spamming, posting irrelevant or inflammatory content"
"impersonation (pretending to be someone else) are strictly prohibited on DebateArt.com"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
She wasnt banned for being a troll, but for being proud black woman and for expressing her skin color proudly with no shame. If they wanted to ban trolls, they would start with me, not her. But I am not black. I am white, and asian.
LOL, if you think Leshwanda was not a troll, then you should be glad you can't be banned for being stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I think more than liberals get offended by being called insultsAn insult would be if somebody walked up and called me a stupid cracker. Now if somebody said "white people are stupid crackers" that would not be an insult.
You think the N word is OK, but not the word cracker?
So, if I called you a stupid trailer park white trash racist, that would be OK, as long as I don't say cracker?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
"mono-ideological chat rooms"
Well said.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
I mean Lashwnda was basically online blackface. E-blackface if you will. If someone puts on blackface and starts machine-gunning the N-word in a "friendly" way it's still pretty racist.We don't want to ban racism and put people in echo chambers where they can be radicalized for extreme violenceHeh. Lashwnda was a noble e-blackface account struggling to turn extremists away from even worse racism, was she.
There's that, and as he points out, it's racism that keeps people from "extreme violence" LOL.
Can't argue with that logic.
That's the problem with this site, too many people think trolling the opposition is actually debating, and uh, they seem to think it's noble because it will attract a higher caliber of debaters or something. That brilliant plan overlooks the idea that the people they pretend to want to attract, people who are looking for an intelligent exchange of ideas, are not gonna stay and become a member when they read most of this shit.
Bullshit attracts bullshit, stupidity attracts stupidity, but Leshwanda is going to elevate the site LOL.
Created: