southsamurai

Dude. You know what I’m talking about, don’t pretend otherwise

So, all I have to do is pump my semen into enough women, get them knocked up, and have thirty votes? Awesome! I’ll be my own bloc!

No, no citizen whatsoever should be able to cast the votes of other citizens, period.

If the kid can’t get in the voting booth by themselves, cast their own vote without assistance, then they aren’t voting, someone else is.

In that regard, they already have representation by their parents’ votes. All it would achieve is giving parents outsized voting power.

Man, it’s a tough one.

In theory, nobody should be disenfranchised by age at all. But at what age would they be able to vote, as in understand what to do, how to do it, and do so without adult supervision?

Until they reach that point, it’s essentially their parents or guardians getting an extra vote.

And then you have to look at other things we limit minors on by virtue of not being able to make informed decisions. So, would we go with driving age, since that’s when we trust them with a ton of death machine? Drinking age? Age of consent for sex (which isn’t always 18)?

If we change it away from 18 to lower, showing that they have the full rights of any citizen, why don’t they get those other rights with enfranchisement? Why is someone able to vote like someone that has the ability to make an informed choice, but they can’t drink? Hell, that’s already a problem since 18 year olds can be sent to fight and die in the military, but can’t have a beer legally.

I would be fine with 16 being the age of majority for everything if the individual wanted it. You wanna step into adult life, with all the rights and responsibilities, I don’t have an objection to that at 16. I had too many patients that were married and working before 18 to pretend that it isn’t realistic for someone that age to step into adulthood. I don’t think it’s the best choice, but I wouldn’t fight it if the world decided that way.

I could definitely made an informed decision for voting at 16. I had access to alcohol, and was able to make the decision to not use it, same with tobacco. I had access to sex, and made the decision to make it safe sex. I was a decent driver, and didn’t have even a fender bender until I was 19, and I wasn’t the one that caused it then. All of the stuff that we limit to “adults”, I know I would have been fully capable of making informed and conscientious decision about any of them.

But I also knew other teenagers that were absolute morons that couldn’t be trusted not to jerk off in the school bathroom. I knew 16 yos that wrecked cars and put other people’s lives at risk in the process. So I’m okay with the age of majority being 18 too; some of those morons would just flip a coin for their vote, and the mock votes we’d have in school were laughable across the board.

Not everyone can make an informed and conscientious decision at 30, much less 18.

So I don’t really think it needs to change, but I agree with you that it sucks that it’s so arbitrary.

No worries :)

Usually a ball cap of some variety, I have a couple.

It was probably my favorite, a custom one a friend got me that has “Mrs Lovett’s meat pies” on it. Custom because my giant dome made the ones that were available from the show itself look ridiculous lol.

There’s also a pride hat, a pirate hat with “surrender the booty” stitched in small print above the back band, a random ebay find with Bacchus on it, and one that’s just plain black.

I’ve got a boonie hat that I use when it’s raining, and a couple of dressier ones that look nice when I have to/should wear a suit.

After my hairline started receding and I got my first sunburn, me and hats became friends lol.

HR isn’t the employees friend, ever.

But that’s where you start the paper trail. It’s really the safest bet

There’s a couple of ways to approach this idea. Literal and figurative.

Within the myth itself, the oldest version has the theft occurring after Zeus banned humanity from having access to fire because of fuckery with sacrifices (that was instigated by Prometheus). So, if taken is the myth is taken literally, it isn’t about whether or not humans could pick up fire that Zeus created via lightning, or other methods, it was about them not being allowed to. By Prometheus giving them fire, he gave them the means to make it themselves rather than it being something the gods owned exclusively.

While that still has the hole that it was basically trying to play games to bypass the command of Zeus rather than giving something humans could have tried to steal on their own, and ignores that fire is a phenomenon of physics and chemistry rather than only being granted by a divine force; it’s still the gist of that original myth as it existed when Hesiod set it down in writing.

Now, I think we all know that the myths weren’t literal at all. There was no Zeus, and lightning wasn’t the only source of fire for humans at all. There’s not much in the way of hard evidence of how humans first harnessed fire, whether it was from external sources like lightning, or lava; or if it was discovered as part of the flint knapping process (little sparks can fly under the right circumstances), or other options.

And it isn’t like the Greeks necessarily held every myth to be literal truth. They did have a degree of awareness of myth as symbolism.

And that’s where the figurative comes in.

If your interpret the myth as fire being symbolic of technology, of thought and philosophy, of shifting from hunter-gatherer culture to a more stable location that allows for development of technology faster, then what Prometheus stole wasn’t fire, it was the essence of divinity, the spark that made the gods other than human.

In that respect, you have to understand that Prometheus wasn’t just some rebellious underling. He was a Titan, descended from the oldest gods, just as Zeus was. He was a god of fire, and in some myths was the one that made humans, shaping us from clay. Which is obviously not unique to Greek mythology, but it sets up Prometheus as not only our creator, but our champion among the gods and titans.

Indeed, he’s credited in myth with bringing us more than fire. Art and science were credited to him as well.

Taken as a story about our place in the world, and how we exist as thinking beings, Prometheus is our drive to understand the world around us, and fire is our harnessing even the most primal of forces to our wit and will. It becomes a story of humanity being more than reactive, animalistic creatures; of us seeking to understand the world around us in a way that no other animal has been seen to attempt.

That fire is the fire of creation, of science, of poetry and dance and song.

And, it’s also possible to interpret the myth in other ways, but there’s a limit to how much is readable on a screen before the eyes and brain nope out, so I’ll leave it at that.

I will add that most libraries will have a copy of Bulfinch’s mythology. It isn’t necessarily a perfect source on Greek myths, but it does a good job at being as complete as possible at the time it was written, and doing so in accessible terms. With it being the default text for a very long time, it’s also ubiquitous. Even if your library doesn’t have a copy, there’s project Gutenberg, and you can find torrents or other file sharing sources for it, for free. Amazon usually has free versions of it available too, though I haven’t looked in a while.

Yeah, it’s now a term that people request they be referred to as by others, not just in group.

How do you determine when to call for proof or not?

It could have “during a discussion” at the end, with or without “online” as further clarification

I kinda assumed that it was either a language/translation issue, or trying to find the best way to express it due to some other difficulty.

Not that it matters really, but it does mean that it’s difficult to be certain we’re answering the right question

Migrating changes the account completely. There’s a connection between the two, if the person chooses to do it that way, but they don’t federate as the same account.

So you’d have to ban the new account as well.

Sugar free, but are they artificially sweetened?

Edit: nvm, I should have just explained rather than asking and not waste your time, my apologies.

Reason I asked is that while nothing in those flavor packets spoils in a way that will harm you, nor break down into something that could, they may well taste unpleasant.

Artificial sweeteners in particular kinda get “stale”, unless stored completely air free. They lose sweetness, and if the other chemicals are mixed with the sweetness in mind, it might not be enjoyable.

But there’s no actual expiration date on any of the brands or their components that I’ve ever seen. Best by dates aren’t the same thing as expiration dates (which you probably already knew, but figured I’d mention it anyway).

Worst case, it tastes like crap, unless the package has been damaged enough for moisture to get in. If the packet is intact, you’re good to go. Otherwise trash it

Pfft, everyone knows pee is stored in the scrotum

Millions.

And what’s hilarious is that I know so many people that also enjoy the band that it would be losing very little.

That title is word salad, but if I’m reading everything in the text right, it looks like you’re asking when proof is expected to be provided when asked for.

It could be you’re asking when we would ask for proof before considering the other person to be acting in good faith.

It doesn’t matter much which one it is, since the answer from my end is essentially the same thing, but if it isn’t one of those, my response might be different, and thus make this comment off topic unintentionally.

For me, the tipping point is more about a combination of claims and import. The less important it is, the more unbelievable the claims can be before I call shenanigans and want proof if I’m going to continue interacting with someone.

The inverse is true as well. A very important subject, and the less incredible the claims can be before I nope out without proof.

The key is that it’s about the time I’m willing to spend entertaining a discussion.

If I’m confident enough that the person is full of shit, I’m not engaging at all, unless what they’re saying could fuck up someone else’s life in some way. If that’s the case, I don’t engage, but I’ll provide whatever information I have and nope out.

In your example, the claim to be from a low population location is so low importance that IDGAF. The only time that would matter to me is if they’re making claims of authority because of it. Even then, as long as what they’re claiming is consistent with fact that can be looked up, I ain’t got the time to try and pry them out of their story.

There’s also a limit to what kind of proof is acceptable to ask for. Which doesn’t apply to your example, what with them claiming a specific location, but in general, nobody has to dox themselves to satisfy me, so I’ll disengage if I really believe they’re full of shit rather than go there.

I’ll never ask someone for a picture of themselves or any identifying features. It just isn’t acceptable to ask for.

See, there’s a bit of leeway necessary for a semi-anonymous forum to function. You assume the best until something stops that possibility. In the example you gave, one of you brought up “els syndrome” (which isn’t something I’m aware of, and it didn’t come up with a description or other information on a quick search)

If someone is making claims to have a medical condition, and the conversation doesn’t veer into claims of medical fact, I’m perfectly willing to accept their experiences as lived and not care if that matches with other people’s lived experiences. It just doesn’t matter on a partially anonymous forum. It’s the same kind of suspension of disbelief that’s necessary to take anyone’s story at face value. Until and unless their personal experience reaches something known to be false, it isn’t something that matters for having a nice conversation.

If they start claiming that drinking apple cider vinegar cured their AIDS, we got a problem. That’s where things start getting dangerous to others that nighty come along later.

Are those examples enough to get my viewpoint? I don’t wanna belabor the point if it’s clear enough.

Why does it matter at all? Well, there has to be a balance between healthy skepticism and giving people room to express themselves. We should all, always carry a kernel of doubt with us regarding any claims. But we also should always “remember the human”. None of it will achieve both of those perfectly, but that’s the goal.

If the other person is lying out their ass, does it matter? Does the interaction lose value because they’re making things up? I say it doesn’t inherently do so. If I interact with this post of yours, but it turns out you made it all up, it doesn’t devalue the interaction for either of us.

So the balance of this thread is about people expressing something that’s largely internal. If you felt the need to fake the posted conversation snippets, it still expressed something true in you, regardless of objective reality. We, as people, can still have valuable interaction over fiction. You making it up would not have any impact on the value I have/get in my response.

Your examples don’t meet the criteria for proof in my mind. You had what looks to be an interesting conversation with someone. That’s the primary thing, imo. Was the human interaction worth the time put in?

I will as soon as gooses stop invading the lower 48.

Meese are the armored division of the Canadian invasion. The gooses and meese are a menace

The animal with the most correct plural forms on earth!

Octopuses, octopi, octopodes, octopus.

Vastly superior to that lowly beast that doesn’t even have a plural form, the moose.

Overall? Dogs.

They’re the most perfect animal for companions. They’ve evolved and been bred to work with us, read us, and be as close to part of human life as possible. Nothing else on this planet is as in sync with us, to the degree that you have to go out of your way to make a dog hate you. Anyone wanting to whine about why they don’t like dogs, or be snide, expect to be ridiculed and insulted. Just a warning.

But that’s not the answer you likely want.

Tigers. Tigers are majestic as fuck. Beautiful, interesting, alien, massive animals. They’re what you would expect to see in the dictionary beside “predator”.

You ever play any of those games where a bunch of idiots are sitting around asking increasingly dumb “what if” questions until someone passes out? One that always seems to come up is “what animal would you fuck if you had to?”

My answer is always “tigers”. And it’s plural. Why plural? Because once you do it once and survive, why would you stop?

Why tigers? Tigers are majestic as fuck. Beautiful, interesting, alien, massive animals. They’re what you would expect to see in the dictionary beside “predator”.

We have a tautology here.

I’m also absurdly fond of chickens now.

I do not, and would not, fuck a chicken.

However, they are endlessly entertaining, and you can eat some of the things that come out of them. That alone is worth some affection.

But then they make noises. Trills and bawks and growls and clucks and little content beak clacks while they nestle into your side as they get ready to nap

They will also rip food not only from your hands, but your mouth if you aren’t careful.

They are dinosaurs you can give offerings to. And you must bring offerings to our dino-chicken overlords, lest they deem you unworthy. Biscuits are preferred, but they will accept almost anything until they find a favorite. Once they find a favorite, you will be scolded if you offer anything else. They will still eat the less preferred offerings, but they will do it with contempt.

Also, no touch. No touch, only look. Touch gets pecks. No touch, only biscuits.

Chickens are apex predators too small to be the apex of anything but a yard. But within that yard, they are as gods!

Unless you have a weedeater, in which case, they will wait in the shrubbery, thank you very much. Weedeaters are straight out.

Absolutely deadly and beautiful creatures, chickens.

As a chronic vegan troll, if you troll vegans in their own colleges communities, expect bans.

You are most definitely the asshole.

Not only for doing something stupid, but then posting a whiny complaint about it in a community that isn’t for this kind of whining.

My dude, if you can’t be bothered to fuck with people inside the rules of the C/ you’re on, just don’t do it at all.