Knuckle

Thank you to whoever got the site up and running again!
 

Thank you to whoever got the site up and running again!
 

I'm looking for pots to smash.

Camp Triggerfish is an... interesting map. It's okay in Turf War, I like the gate mechanic, it makes for an interesting last minute of the match. I'm not too used to the layout just yet, but I'd say this is probably one of the less predictable maps? The fact that it's a circle makes for less chokepoint-ey games. The enemy team can always be invading your base whilst you invade their base, totally missing it. If you never check the map like I do lmao! I like the map, though. It's a nice, fresh setting as well away from all the industrial/urban maps.
 
Tower Control on it is super fun though. Super puppying tense, the tower is always floating over the water for 90% of the game. And I finally got to A- Rank thanks to this stage wooooooop woop. I hope Splat Zones is like, somewhat fun, at least on this map. There aren't many where it is... lol. Bluefin Depot, Arowana Mall and Port Mackerel and that's basically it.
 
Also this image from the current Japanese Splatfest... the teams being Lemon Tea and Milk Tea... the latter team's ink colour... I feel bad for laughing at this put this colour in our versions immediately:
 

Did a speech about the blues for my college speech class. Muddy Waters is as good as they say.
 

The Children's crusade was especially unfortunate...

Happy bday peacexlovexbieber, my fave member

Is there an aboriginal Jesus? I bet he'd have been a cool guy.

You should report that kind of thing to the police rather than posting about it on an internet forum t1g

man chris hemsworth is puppyin hot

I puppying love Fruity Pebbles.

I'm making this really neato mosquito thread because I goddamn love food and so do you, and if you say you don't you are a liar.
 
So just talk about food you like, good food you've eaten today, hell do a five page review of a food you've eaten!
 
Just talk about food! Be hungry!

What in Davy Jones’ locker did ye just bark at me, ye scurvy bilgerat? I’ll have ye know I be the meanest cutthroat on the seven seas, and I’ve led numerous raids on fishing villages, and raped over 300 wenches. I be trained in hit-and-run pillaging and be the deadliest with a pistol of all the captains on the high seas. Ye be nothing to me but another source o’ swag. I’ll have yer guts for garters and keel haul ye like never been done before, hear me true. You think ye can hide behind your newfangled computing device? Think twice on that, scallywag. As we parley I be contacting my secret network o’ pirates across the sea and yer port is being tracked right now so ye better prepare for the typhoon, weevil. The kind o’ monsoon that’ll wipe ye off the map. You’re sharkbait, fool. I can sail anywhere, in any waters, and can kill ye in o’er seven hundred ways, and that be just with me hook and fist. Not only do I be top o’ the line with a cutlass, but I have an entire pirate fleet at my beck and call and I’ll damned sure use it all to wipe yer arse off o’ the world, ye dog. If only ye had had the foresight to know what devilish wrath your jibe was about to incur, ye might have belayed the comment. But ye couldn’t, ye didn’t, and now ye’ll pay the ultimate toll, you buffoon. I’ll shit fury all over ye and ye’ll drown in the depths o’ it. You’re fish food now.

 
But enough mansplaining... have at you!

I don't believe anyone is good but God. You sin differently than I do, but sin is still sin. If you don't deserve heaven, then neither do I. Obviously some sins are worse than others, but the punishment for all sin is death, regardless. We're all going to die. And we're all going to be raised from the dead by Christ.
 
Every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess. You will go to heaven, though you won't get to continue doing the sinful things you do now, so it will be easier on you if you discipline yourself in this life. I don't even think sex will be a thing in heaven, though, let alone gay sex. We will all have new, perfect bodies. Things you think are difficult to do now will be nothing to you then. 
 
There is no hell, from what I can decipher. That was drummed up by someone in the Middle Ages, to keep people fearful of the Church and keep the Church in power. There is only life and death. You are either alive, or you are dead. We're all doomed to die due to sin, but Christ sacrificed himself so that we may have life again. Those that believe in Christ will be punished in this world and will be raised into their new bodies. Those who don't believe will be judged based on their lives and will be quenched of all sin in a holy fire. Then their spirits will be given new bodies as well. The punishment in this life is apparently much easier than what will come next, so believing in Christ in this life does have its benefits, including love and the knowledge that you are eternally protected by God. 
 
God considers persecution and hate to be acceptable punishments for Christians. All Christians should expect persecution, so I don't know whether I should feel blessed that my life has been fairly great, or that I should feel disheartened because I'm not a true believer. But, I don't feel it was meant to be this complicated. 
 
The simple truth is that I do, in fact, believe in Christ and I look forward to the day when he will wipe every tear from our eyes, and there will be no more death or sorrow or crying or pain. All these things will be gone forever. Only love will remain.    And wow, holy wall of text. Sorry, I get to typing and don't really realize I'm typing so much. But hopefully you gained just a bit more insight into my perspective. And I hope I answered your question, lol. 

MURDERLYNCH emso ROOSE BOLTON

MURDERLYNCH emso ROOSE BOLTON

oooooh time to look at the history books and see what they suggest
 
ok so, I see a lot of people justifying their arguments with appeals to capitalism and the idea that a free market will solve homophobia or any other form of bigotry (because the homophobes will be less popular as suppliers of goods and services and this will pressure them to change their ways). This appeal to the power of capitalism is perhaps true in some instances, but doesn't really apply here. The reason is simple; isolated bigotry is a very different beast from systematic oppression, and what we are dealing with in stuff like gay/civil rights is the latter.
 
To clarify, isolated bigotry is just any one guy or small collective of people being unusually racist/sexist/transphobic or whatever. They don't majorly influence the community but if you're someone they hate then they'll go out of their way to harass or demean you in some way. If they own a business they'll apply their prejudices to their practice but nobody approves of it so eventually things will sort themselves out. Systematic oppression is waaaaaay different. This is where a lot of people, perhaps even a majority of people, in a community will cooperate to maintain a status quo of bigotry against some other group. This group makes efforts to keep a status quo, actively preserving their way of life for any of a variety of reasons.
 
Going back to the historical part of my rant, first off I'll point out that most of the prejudice we deal with in America is of the systematic kind I mentioned above. Slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, and even the condemnation of gay marriage are all systematic forms of prejudice. Do you know how many times capitalism has dissuaded systematic oppression? Zero times. Even when people lose money by turning away blacks or refusing to marry gay people, they still go on being prejudiced even if it runs their business into the ground. People hate breaking the status quo, even if the consequences are mild as public condemnation, so they get pressured into bigotry by the forces of prejudice in power. Everyone goes with the system, even when it's oppressive, forever or until some force outside the market (like the government) steps in and changes things)
 
I'd also like to point out that systematic oppression isn't necessarily a bunch of powerful people getting together and engineering a system by which the poor will always be poor, like some sort of Orwellian political system. Sometimes it's just a bunch of people slowly realizing they all don't like minorities or LGBT people so they implicitly cluster together in one community and scare off everyone they hate.
 
Anyway, let me wrap this up by saying I realize I'm mixing a lot of different kinds of oppression together, but nonetheless I think my point stands based on the history that backs it up. Whether it's black people not being allowed to sit on a bus or gay people not being allowed to get married, systematic oppression always ensures the status quo so well that markets can't fix the prejudice. Government or some other force has to step in and force the market to change, as history suggests these things will never fix themselves.
 
(also real quick, as to the whole "it's my right to decide when I do and don't want to offer goods and services to people" argument, that's generally considered invalid in America. If you're making business decisions on rationale that isn't financially reasonable, you're hurting the health of the market as a whole and the government can step in and put a stop to it. This is why we have things like government regulations; you aren't allowed to practice business in a way that significantly inconveniences your customers. And yes, denial of service is a significant inconvenience.)

Nice. I felt like allowing people to refuse service seemed like a counter progressive dead end, but this makes sense of that for me.

oooooh time to look at the history books and see what they suggest
 
ok so, I see a lot of people justifying their arguments with appeals to capitalism and the idea that a free market will solve homophobia or any other form of bigotry (because the homophobes will be less popular as suppliers of goods and services and this will pressure them to change their ways). This appeal to the power of capitalism is perhaps true in some instances, but doesn't really apply here. The reason is simple; isolated bigotry is a very different beast from systematic oppression, and what we are dealing with in stuff like gay/civil rights is the latter.
 
To clarify, isolated bigotry is just any one guy or small collective of people being unusually racist/sexist/transphobic or whatever. They don't majorly influence the community but if you're someone they hate then they'll go out of their way to harass or demean you in some way. If they own a business they'll apply their prejudices to their practice but nobody approves of it so eventually things will sort themselves out. Systematic oppression is waaaaaay different. This is where a lot of people, perhaps even a majority of people, in a community will cooperate to maintain a status quo of bigotry against some other group. This group makes efforts to keep a status quo, actively preserving their way of life for any of a variety of reasons.
 
Going back to the historical part of my rant, first off I'll point out that most of the prejudice we deal with in America is of the systematic kind I mentioned above. Slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, and even the condemnation of gay marriage are all systematic forms of prejudice. Do you know how many times capitalism has dissuaded systematic oppression? Zero times. Even when people lose money by turning away blacks or refusing to marry gay people, they still go on being prejudiced even if it runs their business into the ground. People hate breaking the status quo, even if the consequences are mild as public condemnation, so they get pressured into bigotry by the forces of prejudice in power. Everyone goes with the system, even when it's oppressive, forever or until some force outside the market (like the government) steps in and changes things)
 
I'd also like to point out that systematic oppression isn't necessarily a bunch of powerful people getting together and engineering a system by which the poor will always be poor, like some sort of Orwellian political system. Sometimes it's just a bunch of people slowly realizing they all don't like minorities or LGBT people so they implicitly cluster together in one community and scare off everyone they hate.
 
Anyway, let me wrap this up by saying I realize I'm mixing a lot of different kinds of oppression together, but nonetheless I think my point stands based on the history that backs it up. Whether it's black people not being allowed to sit on a bus or gay people not being allowed to get married, systematic oppression always ensures the status quo so well that markets can't fix the prejudice. Government or some other force has to step in and force the market to change, as history suggests these things will never fix themselves.
 
(also real quick, as to the whole "it's my right to decide when I do and don't want to offer goods and services to people" argument, that's generally considered invalid in America. If you're making business decisions on rationale that isn't financially reasonable, you're hurting the health of the market as a whole and the government can step in and put a stop to it. This is why we have things like government regulations; you aren't allowed to practice business in a way that significantly inconveniences your customers. And yes, denial of service is a significant inconvenience.)

oooooh time to look at the history books and see what they suggest
 
ok so, I see a lot of people justifying their arguments with appeals to capitalism and the idea that a free market will solve homophobia or any other form of bigotry (because the homophobes will be less popular as suppliers of goods and services and this will pressure them to change their ways). This appeal to the power of capitalism is perhaps true in some instances, but doesn't really apply here. The reason is simple; isolated bigotry is a very different beast from systematic oppression, and what we are dealing with in stuff like gay/civil rights is the latter.
 
To clarify, isolated bigotry is just any one guy or small collective of people being unusually racist/sexist/transphobic or whatever. They don't majorly influence the community but if you're someone they hate then they'll go out of their way to harass or demean you in some way. If they own a business they'll apply their prejudices to their practice but nobody approves of it so eventually things will sort themselves out. Systematic oppression is waaaaaay different. This is where a lot of people, perhaps even a majority of people, in a community will cooperate to maintain a status quo of bigotry against some other group. This group makes efforts to keep a status quo, actively preserving their way of life for any of a variety of reasons.
 
Going back to the historical part of my rant, first off I'll point out that most of the prejudice we deal with in America is of the systematic kind I mentioned above. Slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, and even the condemnation of gay marriage are all systematic forms of prejudice. Do you know how many times capitalism has dissuaded systematic oppression? Zero times. Even when people lose money by turning away blacks or refusing to marry gay people, they still go on being prejudiced even if it runs their business into the ground. People hate breaking the status quo, even if the consequences are mild as public condemnation, so they get pressured into bigotry by the forces of prejudice in power. Everyone goes with the system, even when it's oppressive, forever or until some force outside the market (like the government) steps in and changes things)
 
I'd also like to point out that systematic oppression isn't necessarily a bunch of powerful people getting together and engineering a system by which the poor will always be poor, like some sort of Orwellian political system. Sometimes it's just a bunch of people slowly realizing they all don't like minorities or LGBT people so they implicitly cluster together in one community and scare off everyone they hate.
 
Anyway, let me wrap this up by saying I realize I'm mixing a lot of different kinds of oppression together, but nonetheless I think my point stands based on the history that backs it up. Whether it's black people not being allowed to sit on a bus or gay people not being allowed to get married, systematic oppression always ensures the status quo so well that markets can't fix the prejudice. Government or some other force has to step in and force the market to change, as history suggests these things will never fix themselves.
 
(also real quick, as to the whole "it's my right to decide when I do and don't want to offer goods and services to people" argument, that's generally considered invalid in America. If you're making business decisions on rationale that isn't financially reasonable, you're hurting the health of the market as a whole and the government can step in and put a stop to it. This is why we have things like government regulations; you aren't allowed to practice business in a way that significantly inconveniences your customers. And yes, denial of service is a significant inconvenience.)

oooooh time to look at the history books and see what they suggest
 
ok so, I see a lot of people justifying their arguments with appeals to capitalism and the idea that a free market will solve homophobia or any other form of bigotry (because the homophobes will be less popular as suppliers of goods and services and this will pressure them to change their ways). This appeal to the power of capitalism is perhaps true in some instances, but doesn't really apply here. The reason is simple; isolated bigotry is a very different beast from systematic oppression, and what we are dealing with in stuff like gay/civil rights is the latter.
 
To clarify, isolated bigotry is just any one guy or small collective of people being unusually racist/sexist/transphobic or whatever. They don't majorly influence the community but if you're someone they hate then they'll go out of their way to harass or demean you in some way. If they own a business they'll apply their prejudices to their practice but nobody approves of it so eventually things will sort themselves out. Systematic oppression is waaaaaay different. This is where a lot of people, perhaps even a majority of people, in a community will cooperate to maintain a status quo of bigotry against some other group. This group makes efforts to keep a status quo, actively preserving their way of life for any of a variety of reasons.
 
Going back to the historical part of my rant, first off I'll point out that most of the prejudice we deal with in America is of the systematic kind I mentioned above. Slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, and even the condemnation of gay marriage are all systematic forms of prejudice. Do you know how many times capitalism has dissuaded systematic oppression? Zero times. Even when people lose money by turning away blacks or refusing to marry gay people, they still go on being prejudiced even if it runs their business into the ground. People hate breaking the status quo, even if the consequences are mild as public condemnation, so they get pressured into bigotry by the forces of prejudice in power. Everyone goes with the system, even when it's oppressive, forever or until some force outside the market (like the government) steps in and changes things)
 
I'd also like to point out that systematic oppression isn't necessarily a bunch of powerful people getting together and engineering a system by which the poor will always be poor, like some sort of Orwellian political system. Sometimes it's just a bunch of people slowly realizing they all don't like minorities or LGBT people so they implicitly cluster together in one community and scare off everyone they hate.
 
Anyway, let me wrap this up by saying I realize I'm mixing a lot of different kinds of oppression together, but nonetheless I think my point stands based on the history that backs it up. Whether it's black people not being allowed to sit on a bus or gay people not being allowed to get married, systematic oppression always ensures the status quo so well that markets can't fix the prejudice. Government or some other force has to step in and force the market to change, as history suggests these things will never fix themselves.
 
(also real quick, as to the whole "it's my right to decide when I do and don't want to offer goods and services to people" argument, that's generally considered invalid in America. If you're making business decisions on rationale that isn't financially reasonable, you're hurting the health of the market as a whole and the government can step in and put a stop to it. This is why we have things like government regulations; you aren't allowed to practice business in a way that significantly inconveniences your customers. And yes, denial of service is a significant inconvenience.)

make it all about Knuckles instead and it'd be the perfect game

a miserable pile of secrets

definitely not