I was recently watching this man who is a competitive eater talk about how dangerous the sport is. Not dangerous to one's health, but dangerous because of bodily injury. "I once chipped a tooth during a competition, thankfully we had some medics near by to patch me up."
Some people say completive gaming is a sport due to the mental and sometimes physical excursion. Some say that chess is a sport, if only a mental one. Whenever I ask someone of their opinion of what defines a sport, I tend to get mixed answers.
"Anything that requires physical effort."
"Anything that can hurt you."
"A sport is something that has a winner and a loser."
"Sports have trophies for them."
I guess this is more of me asking about what you recognize as a sport and why.
In any case I'm just going to say competitive eating is not a fucking sport. It's a celebration of gluttony at best.
Why are you calling Marmot?
This guy was pretty sure it is a sport. He talked about how he trains for it everyday, he has trophies for it, he has won city and state competitions, and plans to compete nationally.
There was an old (and now sadly deleted) thread where Marmotlord was arguing with everyone about playing video games being a sport. Most people were disagreeing with him and hilarity ensued.
Still, I'd consider playing video games more of a sport than shoving food down your throat like a pig.
Accordig to the Doritos and Mountain Dew ads, Microsoft believes the two things are not mutually exclusive.
Why was it deleted?
It wasn't a mod, it was just system site failure.
When this place has those glitches that cause this place to go into error mode, there's sometimes a very small chance one of the larger threads in The Lounge just disappears.
Happened with one of Drakoblare's Hilarious Hate Rallies and another long thread too I believe.
Well, I'm pretty sure Steve is Marmot.
I want your opinion.
a sport, in my opinion, is an activity which requires talent , dedication and training.
And it's serious business.
In going off that, beauty pageants could be considered sport competitions.
One could easily argue that participating in beauty pageants require dedication.
"I have boobs and had the luck to be born this sexy. Give me that trophy"
Not to mention "I have to make myself look better than all the other girls who have boobs and were born sexy", see, that's dedication.
True, however, you don't realize that everyone at the pageant is like that. Because of this, every woman has to try to look and preform better than the other woman. Now, it's a competition.
your POV, m8.
Eeehh...what? POV means point of view...you know that, right? Because that makes no sense, except...you know...beauty depends on POV I guess but still, they compete to look prettier than the rest, I can't see how that is up for interpretation.
Not a POV, it just is. You will never see a girl think that she can just walk into a beauty pageant and win.
And if she does, she is not taking it seriously, which the other girls are doing, and she will lose.
Education is a sport?
education is not serious business.
Really? I challenge you to know more things than I do.
See, I am now competitive about education, making me an athlete, right? This is very serious business after all.
You may be competitive, but I am not. I do not take it seriously = for me its not competitive = it doesnt fit the definition (my definition)
It has to be serious for all involved.
Okay, fine, I challenge Danaos to know more things than I do, he already said he takes this serious. Are we now athletes?
Name the topic and I'll drop so many bombs on you that you'll think God is taking a dump on your life.
if you're not trolling, then I consider your activity competitive and a candidate for a new sport.
Oh, we are very serious.
And even if we were trolling, it wouldn't matter, because we just showed you how anything can be done in a competetive way meaning that according to your definition anything can be a sport.
A slight addition to my definition would be "and it has to e recognized as sport by at least one relevant country".
If Tadjikistan suddenly decides that what you do is a sport, then yes, it's a fucking sport and there's nothing you can do to chnge it.
"By at least one relevant country"
At first...I was going to continue challenging your definition of gaming but...now I'm more curious to know what countries are relevant, or more specifically, what countries are not relevant?
As long as it has a government, a flag, an anthem, a history of at least one year and is recognized as independent by all it's neighbors and all other relevant nations in a 100 mile radius on sea, it' a relevant nation.
So Sealand is not a relevant country? I consider it to be a relevant country even though not every country recognizes it as independant and it only has about 8 inhabitants.
Why not Narnia.
Are you even trying?
Because Sealand exists in real life whereas Narnia is fantasy? Google Sealand if you don't know what it is.
I am well aware of the status of all micronations and none fits the criteria for "relevant nation"
Yes, I have free time and strange hobbies.
If you know what it is then why compare it to Narnia? Narnia is fictional. At least name another micronation if you're going to compare it to something.
Also, I'd say it's a relevant nation, they have a national football team..or did at some point, I don't know how active it is right now.
not recognized by neighbors. Because its an "island"-nation, neighbors = the first country you get to if you go straight north/south/east/west from the exact center of the supposed political entity you desire to call nation.
And it doesnt fit.
And I said Narnia because, while, fictional, Narnia, fits more criteria than Sealand, so it's basically closer to relevancy. And that to show you how bad yor example was.
So actually existing is less valuable in deciding what is a relevant country than what the neighbors think in your opinion? Good to know.
Steve, are you going to argue that Israel is not a country?
*not a relevant country
Oh yes, my mistake.
None of Israel's neighbors acknowledge it as a country.
It's kinda like Narnia, lol.
I hope he wasn't being serious...
I get to choose the topic, you'll regret that.
The Icelandic language.
I'll start: The Icelandic for penguin is mörgæs, which could directly translate to bloodgoose.
Uh...you win. I can't do this without Google Translate.
Success! Where is my medallion?
You don't get one! You had an unfair advantage.
You gave that advantage to me of your own free will when you allowed me to choose any topic without having to receive a confirmation from you or anyone else. It was fair, accept it.
Fine fine, you take this one, but I'll return.
What about game shows revolving around education?
You could consider the ability to answer questions on a game show to be a talent.
that could take a while to fit under the criteria but it could have the potential to become a sport..... of sorts.
No, it won't ever be considered a sport, nor does it have the potential.
You're not the one to decide that.
I am very serious about being smarter and more educated than those I compete with. Scholarships aren't just given to anyone, I have to out do everyone else for it.
even if you are serious, the others involved may not be.
Not always, during my recent football season, we were running undefeated and went against a team that hasn't won a single game in a couple of years.
They knew that they were trash, and by the way they played, they didn't take it seriously.
Then it shouldn't have counted.
That doesn't make any sense. We still won the game, and we still were considered the victors even if it was completely one-sided. It was still a football game, just unbalanced.
Roy Jones Jr. was a championship boxer, and he got so good at the sport that no one could actually challenge him. Eventually he lost because he wasn't taking it serious anymore. That doesn't mean that his boxing suddenly wasn't a sport.
The same can be said for Anderson Silva, an MMA fighter.
Am I the only one seeing you post as "I ARE WINNER AND WHAT I SAY IZ RIGHT BECAUSE I ARE WINNER"?
Am I the only one seeing you post as "I have no valid rebuttal, so instead I will try to make sure no one takes his point seriously."
You are unsuccessful, and see how that point can be made with proper grammar and no caps lock?
I don't know where you've got the idea that i give a fuck anymore.
I think there's a rant thread i've started recently when ive stated im no longer holding back on anything. I just say what is on my mind in the exact moment when it is on my mind.
That's fine, I'm just trying to help you get what is on your mind across.
That sounds evil.
You tend to go into full "insult others" mode, which makes it difficult to take whatever it is you're saying seriously, thus, if you don't do that or use improper grammar or such, what is on your mind doesn't come properly across.
oh and you dont like insults.
And I give a fuck about that.
Try reading my message again, I understand you're tired, but I clearly did not say that I don't like insults. I usually find them hilarious when an angry losing debater makes them, however, people stop taking you seriously when you do that, and you did say earlier that you give a fuck about speaking your mind, which becomes difficult and dare I even say it, pointless, when no one around is listening.
again, I give a fuck about that.
Well, you sure said so earlier. Stop pretending not to care whether people take you seriously or not, you clearly do, otherwise you wouldn't even make that reply.
No. I'm not pretending. I am just fucking tired of saying something and people acting like I said something else.
I want to clear it up because my opinion is my opinion, and your way of saying it makes it sound like it's no longer my opinion. And that pisses me off so much, that i want to murder your whole family for it. But , fortunately for you, all I can do is reply. Pray for technology to not evolve too fast or stop misreading my opinions.
"I want to clear it up because my opinion is my opinion, and your way of saying it makes it sound like it's no longer my opinion."
Quote please. What part did you read that way? If you did, you misread my message. That doesn't make me want to kill anyone, guess what that makes me want to do: find out what was misread and explain what I actually meant.
I strongly suspect I won't get that quote because I think you pulled that out of nowhere in an attempt to have a rebuttal.
Also, yes, pretending not to care, it's a very popular thing for people still trying to win a losing debate, yet still they seem to care enough to actually reply: ergo, they do care, they're just pretending.
The two examples with the "relevant neighbors =/= at least 2 neighbors" part.
I meant the same thing with both yet you interpreted one differently and fucked it all up, prompting me to go semiberserk.
and stop fucking saying I pretend stuff. I genuinely do not give a fuck on certain stuff, until it gets on my nerves. Like israel's political status, i really did not give a shit on it until it got mentioned too many times and i got fed up, eyetwitch an all, so i finally went and googled it.
Fucking up people's nerves for the sake of debate sounds like trolling to me.
I strongly suspect you are trolling me because you're getting on my nerves more and more with every new reply.
You didn't say those as the same thing and you go berserk when we read it differently? Those two quotes are clearly very different, if you miswrote, that's fine, i can fully accept that, it happens to the best of us, but getting angry when people read what you wrote instead of what you meant? I don't deserve that and you know it.
I believe you didn't care about the Israel stuff, and I never said you didn't. You claimed not to care whether people take you seriously or not, that's what I replied to.
Fucking up people's nerves? I'm not doing that, you just suddenly got overly sensitive to your opinions being criticized (which you weren't before, odd, you just replied to the criticism in a rational manner earlier).
In every thread where you're debating and suddenly go all haywire on everyone you end up accusing someone of being a troll when it turns out that wasn't the case. Think about that.
"I don't deserve that and you know it."
Am I even supposed to care about what you deserve?
"Fucking up people's nerves? I'm not doing that"
you just did! So now you're telling a lie! Wow, stop sinning so much, the Devil is jealous.
"you just suddenly got overly sensitive to your opinions being criticized"
And? Am I not allowed to? Is it illegal?NO. THEN FUCKING EXPECT IT.
"In every thread where you're debating and suddenly go all haywire on everyone you end up accusing someone of being a troll"
I feel trolled . So I go Captain Obvious and say it. Again, what is wrong with that?
"Am I even supposed to care about what you deserve?"
I didn't tell you to care or what you're supposed to do, I said you know it. You're not even replying to what I'm writing here.
"you just did! So now you're telling a lie! Wow, stop sinning so much, the Devil is jealous."
Explain. How am I fucking up someone's nerves? Don't ignore this, you just compared me to the devil, explain. Don't say it's because you're taking my attempts to help you develop you opinions as attacks because then you're blaming me for how you've decided to understand what I'm saying instead of what I actually mean and apparently you hate it when others do that to you, correct?
"And? Am I not allowed to? Is it illegal?NO. THEN FUCKING EXPECT IT."
You're allowed to, but you're blaming me for the fact that you got overly sensitive. Also, I can't expect everything allowed on the internet because nearly everything is allowed on the internet.
"I feel trolled . So I go Captain Obvious and say it. Again, what is wrong with that?"
You always seem to feel trolled when you're angry.
Yes, you said I know it. I didnt argue with that. I know i'm a jerk. What can I do, hide it? Why hide it? I dont see the point in not being myself.
You fucked up my nerves for the past 3 hours. I got angry to the point of a nosebleed. So yes, you got on my nerves, isn't "getting on someone's nerves" = "making someone angry"? Yes, I sarcastically compared you to the devil because you've just added something new to the list of things you did today that get on my nerves, and who keeps doing bad things? the devil! now, it was a very basic analogy and i'm knows to make bad puns, so I seriously expected you to forget i said that the moment you finished reading the phrase and never mention it again because it wasnt meant to be the subject of more than one phrase, but nooo, you had to mention it yet again. I'm nicknaming you now, really. Sindevil. yes, I will call you Sindevil from now on.
i'm not blaming you for the fact that i get sensitive sometimes, really. I'm blaming you for the fact that you're not expecting it. If you can't expect it, BAD LUCK FOR YA, WHAT CAN I SAY.
And regarding the last one, if you'd get annoyed past a certain point every time, you'd think you're trolled too. Action and reaction. I just state it too much.
I didn't tell you to hide it, be yourself, by all means, but you're still acting like I'm trying to force you into all kinds of things when this is not the case.
And we've got namecalling. Yay. You know, you're the one getting angry, I can't help it if you get angry at non-hostile debating.
You know what's also allowed on the internet? Debating, yet you didn't seem to expect that, or at least you suddenly got very angry because of it, but as always, your logic only applies to you, right?
Maybe I would think I'm being trolled, but if I had a history of accusing people of trolling when they're not, I might reflect on that and think "hey, maybe that's what's happening now".
"but you're still acting like I'm trying to force you into all kinds of things when this is not the case."
"I can't help it if you get angry at non-hostile debating."
then don't help. Same with the poor Somali kids you can't help right now. I dont mind.
"your logic only applies to you, right?"
I understand Marmotlogic gained meme status in here but stop implying there's logic in hat I do, even if it sometimes is. It makes me nervous.
" I might reflect on that and think "hey, maybe that's what's happening now". "
I don't bother. I feel trolled. Simple as that.
You don't bother to ponder what-ifs and yet you claim to feel very secure about your intellect. That's...that's great.
Also, I wasn't referencing the meme.
"I can't help it" doesn't literally mean you're trying to help someone "although I am", it means you are wrong to blame me for it because it's not something I do.
And? And what? I have nothing to add to that.
"You don't bother to ponder what-ifs and yet you claim to feel very secure about your intellect. That's...that's great."
I find contradictions in my mentality if I ask myself questions. And I dont like that. So i dont do it.
""I can't help it" doesn't literally mean you're trying to help someone"
I know, I was just answering with a similar phrasing for the sake of it. My tendency for bad puns was involved, yes.
"And? And what? I have nothing to add to that."
I relate to that daily. People expect reactions from me yet....nothing. So I say "Fuck." And then I look for things to do.
"I find contradictions in my mentality if I ask myself questions. And I dont like that. So i dont do it. "
Yes, It's not always easy, but I recommend trying it, you can learn alot about yourself, and thus you become better at learning and understanding everything around you. Remember, answers come from questions not the other way around...except for Jeopardy.
The last time I did it I found the meaning of life and pondered about the future of humanity for 6 hours straight reaching the end conclusion that we're bound forever in a doomsday loophole , never going to reach real balance , and that society will crumble over and over endlessly without learning from it's own mistakes, but repeating them because we are unable to think outside the box for too long, always returning to old ideas that are fundamentally bad.
So no, I'd rather not repeat the experience.
Sounds bad, but do you know what? If you hadn't done that, you would never have learned that it's bad. Imagine what you could learn next time.
I fear I might cause the apocalypse if I use my brain like that again. Not joking.
At least brain damage to self is guaranteed. Maybe im the next Stephen Hawking.
So gaming stops being a sport if you challenge someone who doesn't take it seriously? That's what it sounds like you're saying.
In that case, wouldn't things like gaming and competitive eating be a sport?
I hate you.
Most people that I talk to will swear up and down that gaming and eating isn't a sport. I guess for me, when it comes to sports, not everyone can be involved in a sport.
Anyone can game (unless they don't have any limbs) and anyone can eat (unless they're dead).
In terms of gaming, I can smack the buttons like an idiot and always come out on top. No skill required. With eating...I, well, eat. No skill required.
Well...anyone can be involved in a sport, regardless of whether or not they are good at it. I suck at basketball but I could still participate, couldn't I?
I still don't think gaming is a sport though because it's not physical (unless you count pushing buttons physical but according to that logic, working as an accountant is a physical job).
There is absolutely no chance for you to in a competittive gaming tournament or even a single match by simply mashing buttons.
There's a higher chance of a nigerian scam actually not being a scam and you getting the money without participating than winning a single league game of Dota 2
Although I still disagree with Steve_Greg's overall point, I have to agree with this one, if you can win by button mashing you're not playing against anyone truly competetive (or if he is, then he must be equally oblivious to how the game works).
Gaming is a hobby and while I know it's all the rage in South Korea and the "athletes" even have their little loli groupies there, I don't consider it a sport.
Can you do it competitively? Yeah, but it's still not a sport. You can do almost anything competitively.
Everyone can play a video game and everyone can eat. There's nothing special about doing either of those things.
How does playing a video game or eating food require physical exertion? I mean even something like throwing a discus or shot-put requires some REAL physical exertion.
Video game? You're sitting on your ass watching blinking lights.
The only challenge is being able to click faster than your opponent.
Eating? You're sitting on your ass shoveling food in your mouth.
The only challenge there is trying not to choke yourself while being a complete fucking pig and keeping your heart from exploding before the other guy beside you.
I don't consider Poker or Chess to be "sports" either. Games? Yes. Do you need skill to win and be good at them? Yes. Still not sports.
so you have a definition for a category of things... then there's things which fit the definition yet are not in category = they're exceptions.
And I thought my mindset is fucked up.
Could sex be considered a sport? It meets Ford and Steve's criteria.
It is physically exerting. It requires some dedication. You have to be well trained in it if you don't want to cum too fast. Also, you want to last long, that requires stamina. Porn stars are athletes in that way. They compete with each other to make the best film and have the best fuck.
you got a little off the rails but yes. Sex could be a sport.
Only its not ethical.
Why is sex not ethical? Without it we would all go extinct! Our very survival depends on it
So in order to keep the sport clean, the competitors shouldn't use condoms?
Let's save the discussion of ethics for another day.
Yeah and they have blow job competitions with porn stars. And while those ladies are probably expending a lot more physical energy than the gamer clicking a mouse button, it's still not a fucking sport because every goddamn woman can suck dick.
There's nothing special about it unless it's the woman that happens to be sucking YOUR dick at the time.
Nope not contradictory at all.
I'm well aware stuff like Chess is considered a "sport" and the world is just wrong on that one. Not the first time.
I'd say that real physical exertion in regards to sports is when the movement is the point. In football (soccer if you're american), there are rules about how you can touch the ball, where you have to be when you do so and a specific distance between where the ball starts and where you are supposed to plant it by kicking it or slamming your head into it. In games, yeah, you move your fingers, but that's really to achieve the goal of moving whatever it is on screen that you're supposed to move, there is no real effort to make it a physical challenge like the "real sports" do, unless you're talking about something like the Wii.
That makes sense.
okay, who the fuck keeps bringing up this physical exertion part, i personally do not see it as a relevant criteria in naming something a sport.
Because that's literally what a sport is defined as, lol.
We bring it up because we see it as a relevant criteria in naming something a sport, you know, we other people with our own opinions that differ from yours.
Because it is one of the main arguments for defining a sport.
For me, real physical exertion is something that requires you to strengthen and build your muscles for. For gaming, playing chess, and eating, you don't need to strengthen your muscles for it. In football, tennis, and mma, you need to build your body to a level to wear you can actually compete, unlike chess and gaming where you need to build your mind. Competitive eating is neither, at least not from what I have seen. Sure, you can develop tactics that make consuming the food easier, but no physical training is required. I met a guy who has never worked out a day in his life, but he is a competitive eater.
Also, sports like football, tennis, and MMA, also need you to train mentally. A football player has to be able to notice a flaw in the oppositions formations and drill through them, while at the same time working with those around to prevent losing any ground. A tennis player needs to gain control of the playing field and predict and time where the ball will land. An MMA fighter has to be able to anticipate his/her opponents movements and react accordingly, he/she also has to gain the knowledge on how to counter and defend against certain attacks.
Well, if I was insanely and infinitely rich, enough to bend laws and get away with them, and enough to build my own coliseums and put up my own network, there would be a few sports that I would invent and endorse, no matter who bothered to watch.:
Endmaster's baby-throwing, where babies are hurled against a concrete slab with a bullseye painted on it to save us all from rampant overpopulation.
Endmaster's Toddler-Tossing, same thing, but you can't end overpopulation by limiting yourself just to newborns.
Gladiator games, I never understood why they got rid of those...
Team Fortress IRL.
It's like sex, but extreme.
My first guess would be having sex while sky diving or something similar.
You ever see how they jump across rooms in circuses? They could do that, but naked. When they cross, they guy has to get in at least one more pump than he did the last time before he jumps to the other side.
using a 20-inch thick and 2-feet long massive vibrating dildo made of iron to anally please self while taking at least 5 "giant"-category penises in all other holes, outdoors, during a tornado, while running backwards on a skateboard, chased by tigers and a horny horse, on the wrong highway lane at 100 mph while stepping on legos.
That's not a sport. That's a movie. Lol.
Maybe movies can be sports too
Tom Cruise will become the greatest athlete of all time!
Here's one activity.
I tie the girl to a bed/table and attach myself to a zipline suspended 100+ feet from the ground. I zip down, and attempt to enter the drop zone without breaking my penis, or the girl.
I'd pay to watch that. You've got yourself an audience!
Good question! If that happens, you're shit outta luck.
You have to train yourself extensively to avoid that I assume? And you have to be very dedicated about it
Oh yeah. Daily masturbation with no lubricant is the best training to ensure a strong penis. Viagra is illegal in this sport though, it's like steroids for your dick, minus the shrinking effect.
And at least one country you can see on your 6th grade geography book must say that what you're doing is a sport.
Except for Israel, right? Because of the whole "neighbors not seeing it as a country" thing?
Btw, any fictional countries that count, you know, since not existing isn't that much of a hinderance?
Okay, im really bored and not going to research the israel not being recgonized by neighbors shit, but if its real then Israel is not relevant in this matter for me. End of story.
If I remember correctly, Israel was founded sometime during or after World War II and took the territory of a few countries in the area. The day after it was founded, the surrounding Arabian states attacked it.
......and that aids who's point of view?
I am talking about the political situation in the last 24h. Not 1945.
Point being, Israel is hated by it's neighboring nations, which by you definition makes Israel irrelevant. However, if you pay attention to American politics, Israel is one of our greatest allies. Israel can also be credited for maintaining some sort of order in their area, since they have a strong military, good leaders, and they are one of the nations that possess nuclear arms. They are FAR from being irrelevant.
hated =/= not recognized as independent.
Romania hates Hungary. But still recognizes it's independence.
My info may be outdated, and i really dont believe that israel went that downhill, so I doubt it's not recognized as independent. But if indeed it's not, then sorry Israel, your opinion on the matter means nothing for me.
I can say with certainty that the Arabian states do not recognize Israel as an independent state. They probably see Israel as intruders taking land that does not belong to them.
EDIT: I'm addressing how you say that your neighbors failing to acknowledge your sovereignty disqualify you from being a relevant state. Israel is not acknowledged by its neighbors, but it is one of the most relevant countries in this world.
This doesn't have anything to do with Israel being downhill, it has to do with angry Arabs not wanting Jews in their "land".
you're getting on my nerves, im researching this.
Fuck you, Egypt and Syria recognize Israel.
So Israel counts as relevant
Who said that it doesn't count as relevant?
What Defines a Sport?
56 minutes ago
And this makes it not relevant how?
If what Danaos said was real, then Israel's POV on what is a sport wouldn't mean anything for me, excluding it from the list of nations I consider relevant in the matter, making any possible activity that Israel could deem as "sports" not sports in my opinion.
But since we've cleared Israel's political status, let's get back to sports.
*Points to below posts*
I guess a simple name and quote wouldn't suffice. Though I was wrong about the "none" part. I forgot that Israel borders Egypt.
Of course not, you fucking asshole.
Oh wait, I take that back.
The peace between Egypt had nothing to do with Egypt's acknowledgement of Israel being an independent state. Apparently the U.S. had a hand in it, among other reasons.
Can I ask where you found that Syria and Israel are on good terms and recognize Israel. From what I've read, Israel and Syria are butting heads...still.
Pink means those countries do not count Israel as independent ("relevant")
look at the map. Syria and Egypt are not pink.
as ive said, being on good terms doesnt matter. Recognition of independence does.
That's Jordan, not Syria.
And as I've stated before, U.S. intervention goes a long way.
As long as you're not implying Israel is the 51st state of the US, the US has nothing to do with israel's relevance here.
Does not accept Israeli passports.
Syria is purple.
Purple = States that do not formally recognize Israel.
it's 1 AM.
Do you seriously expect me to basic geography.
Regardless of why a mistake is made, he is bound to point it out, he is debating you after all.
correct it and get over it already then. If it would have been the other way around i would have pointed it out and said something like " but anyway, considering you've meant Jordan , bla bla etc" , not just state it like "ooh, you got this tiny thing wrong , your argument must be invalid hehehe gotcha sucker"
I didn't even realize you meant Jordan until Drako pointed it out...
He didn't, he said "Syria is purple. Purple = States that do not formally recognize Israel."
He didn't rub it in, he didn't even say your argument was invalid, he just corrected you. That was all.
he said it in a way that made me feel like he rubbed on it.
Nah, the map was a bit hard to see.
Anyway, I also forgot that you stated that it has to be recognized by "all" neighboring nations to be relevant. You specifically said "all" nations, but then you changed your argument to just "two."
someone gave a example with canada and mexico, which are just 2 nations.
I didnt change my argument, i just gave an example with 2 ntions.
AND GODDAMIT CYS GET YOUR SHIT RIGHT STOP TURNING WHAT I TYPE INTO A FUCKING PUZZLE
That was me, and Canada and Mexico are the only neighboring countries to USA (unless I am mistaken if so I apologize), you however turned that into countries just requiring 2 nations to recognize them.
"But if any country with at least 2 neighbors which are considered relevant suddenly stops being considered relevant by both, then it is ousted from my "relevant nations" list. No, im not keeping a list." - Steve_Greg
You seemed to hold onto this argument when you said that Israel is relevant because Egypt and Syria (though you meant Jordan) recognize it. Thus, you changed your argument. Maybe I'm just reading it wrong, or you worded wrong.
I held to it. I didnt change it. I offered an example to show what im talking about. I didnt change it.
The fact that Israel is recognized by only two of it's many more neighbors is a coincidence.
But you did change it. You originally said that it has to be "all" neighboring nations that recognize it. Then that idea was challenged by the United States, which by the way is a single country since there are no 'independent' states', and you said that at "at least two neighbors" have to recognize you.
"As long as it has a government, a flag, an anthem, a history of at least one year and is recognized as independent by all it's neighbors and all other relevant nations in a 100 mile radius on sea, it' a relevant nation."-Steve_Greg
See how you changed it? It quite clearly went from "all it's neighbors" to "at least 2 neighbors".
it seems I may have forgotten adding "relevant" to the middle of the part you first underlined.
I am usually more careful with this shit but...... I have excuses.
That part isn't the contradiction though.
Yes it is. Add "relevant" before "neighbors" in the first definition and you'll notice both phrases are actually a definition and an example of said definition aka the same phrase only with different wording.
? What the hell did you read?
One phrase says "all countries" the other says "at least 2 countries".
if "all countries" is just 2 countries, because let's imagine a country with just 2 neighbors, then THE SECOND PHRASE IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE FIRST.
No, because the second quote says "at least 2 countries", that "at least" means there are more, but 2 is the minimum.
You name a country that has the potential to be relevant yet has less than 2 neighbors.
Swaziland counts Lesotho as neighbor because of political reasons. San Marino is not relevant. Vatican is not relevant. Monaco counts Italy. Hong Kong and Taiwan are technically irrelevant.Most Pacific ocean nations are irrelevant, although Hawaii is counted as relevant because it's a US state. Go.
Less? Fail to see what that has anything to do with this.
Here's my point again, which you have been dancing around (no, not literally): you said all neighboring countries but accept it's independancy and then you changed it to 2 countries being the minimum for accepting a country as a relevant country.
I WAS THINKING OF YOUR FUCKING AMERICA WITH TWO NEIGHBORS EXAMPLE YOU FUCKING TWAT.
then I realized less than two neighbors would make it irrelevant anyway. I did not change anything. I perpetuated your example, jut imagining what if USA was one state and not 50.
The USA is indeed 50 states. It is a union. However, these states are not sovereign since there is a central government. That's why it's called the United States. One nation, fifty states.
Also, South Korea is very relevant, due to its issue with North Korea.
it is technically bordering Japan too.
Actually, North Korea, despite meeting the necessary conditions, is actually LESS relevant.
You do realize that bordering another country means that they are on the same land mass right? Japan borders no countries.
Although North Korea is stupid, it's still relevant.
He did say that for countries not connected to any country because of water has special rules.
Of course, more of his "special rules."
I remember a time when "special" was a good thing.
Do remember again that these are my standards, my views.
And i've noticed quite long ago that my own views on the very same thing can be conflicting themselves multiple times in the same phrase. Yet they wouldn't work otherwise.
I know, I was pointing out how you weren't contradicting yourself and you did actually explain the scenario Danaos was referring to.
Sounds like the Bible...
Yeah...I went there.
If you had said that "nations with ONLY two neighbors aren't recognized," I think that would have fixed it.
That would exclude too many countries that are actually very relevant.
Britain owned it as 'Palestine' before it became Israel.
Thank you for that. I knew I was missing something.
Don't say end of story in a debate, that makes it seem like you are not open to other people's points and that is the point of debating. I mean, I'm open for you to convince me that video games are a sport, I'm just waiting for better reasons.
Also, can you tell me why countries need to be recognized by their neighbors as countries to be a relevant country? If Canada and Mexico suddenly said "you know what, fuck USA, that's not a real country" USA would suddenly not be a relevant country?
"end of story" as in "AND THIS IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT ISRAEL".
And USA is a special example, being made of 50 states which are counted separately for this matter. But if any country with at least 2 neighbors which are considered relevant suddenly stops being considered relevant by both, then it is ousted from my "relevant nations" list. No, im not keeping a list.
Don't go caps lock either.
Okay, you've explained the whole "countries need to be accepted as relevant countries by neighboring relevant countries to be relevant" thing, but why? Why do they need that?
Because otherwise I can claim my hospital bed as a nation and then claim all activities are sports so you'd all be athletes and fuck off already to your sports instead of pestering me at 1 AM on christmas day.
You could make the criteria be a certain number of people, and being active for some time was already a critera so now, according to your definition the hospital bed thing wouldn't work (unless you waited for however long that was).
you know you're discussing MY definition of "relevant nation", right?
Yeah, that's what I said.
Here is a quote from you "As long as it has a government, a flag, an anthem, a history of at least one year and is recognized as independent by all it's neighbors and all other relevant nations in a 100 mile radius on sea, it' a relevant nation."
See, you say very specifically that it needs to have a history of at least one year. Did you just forget what your own definition of relevant nation" was? If not, why question whether or not I know if that's what I'm discussing or not? I clearly said nothing to indicate that.
you implied the exclusion of one condition. I just as easily excluded yet another one. It's my condition, anyway. You're not my boss.
I didn't imply the exclusion of a condition, I questioned it, there is a difference, and are you excluding conditions in your definition now? You didn't really forget we're talking about your definition here, did you?
Also, I am debating your definition, how is that trying to be "your boss"?
because why else would anyone debate MY POV
...That's what debates are for, people with a different point of view discussing them both and the merits of either.
Are you saying that you guys are actually ENJOYING this?
What kind of sick demented psychopaths would... oh, wait, the Internet, right.
It's as if you don't know us.
I don't even know myself lately.
Please quote me on where I said that. I explained what debates are for considering you wondered why someone would debate your pov, which is exactly what debating is for.
Also, I do often enjoy debates, to hear other people's point of views and receive their explanations, to which I represent a rebuttal to get that person to deepen his explanation and then do the same with me.
I know I just said I enjoyed debating, but don't use that as a quote since this message didn't exist prior to you saying "Are you saying that you guys are actually ENJOYING this?", because I want to know what exactly lead you to that conclusion.
everyone has opinions. But also, everyone should keep their opinions for themselves. Unless someone else wants to hear their opinions.
In that case, if you want to share your opinion, you give it. But if someone simply sees your opinion and says "it's wrong", of course you're gonna get angry. It's your opinion, wrong or right, it;s your human right, as a human being, to have it and just because some random asshat says its wrong, you're not going to change it (unless you realize some stuff is off and change it for any reason), because that's how we work as humans.
So, you wanting to discuss my POV means you gave me instructions. I choose if I accept to carry them on. If I do, I acknowledge you partially as my superior ("boss") , but once i'm done, that stops. And you telling me to change my opinion or simply telling me its wrong is you continuing to ct as my boss, which i no longer comply to. Hence, "YOU'RE NOT MY BOSS"
If you enjoy debates, you enjoy being people's boss. Good luck with that.Not everyone is gonna like it. At least not always. You can tell people what their opinions should be, but you must also realize that some just dont want to change their opinions. And when that happens, you shouldn't push it. And if you do, expect reactions like mine.
the paragraph above started with "if" because I view this "I enjoy debating" as something more batshit insane than "The Hangover" trilogy.
If no one challenges a belief, it cannot grow.
If someone says my opinion is wrong, I ask why.
No one is telling you how to live your life, nor are we giving you instructions on anything. Someone in charge generally doesn't care what your personal opinion about something is, as long as you get the job done.
Someone who is a boss doesn't debate, they are in charge. All the boss has to say is "I'm right" and you can either quit or eat shit.
You are interested as to why your opinion might be wrong.
I am not.
And this matters why? That was an example of how a challenge to someone's point of view is not an attack to be upset about, regardless of whether you're interested in his opinion or not.
"is not to be upset about"
this is what YOU think. This is what YOU'd do.By saying this, you're SUGGESTING me to do the same. Do I accept?
You can be upset about whatever you want and I can point out why it's nothing to be upset about because it's not an attack or anything in any hostile way.
And I view that as an insult.
A rational man would ignore petty insults.
I do not prefer to be called rational. Because I view it as an insult too. Standards, m8.
Alright then, challenge my perspective, try that, instead of acting like a victim of someone forcing his opinions on you.
You're telling me what to do again.
Let's see if you can guess my answer: "YOU'RE NOT MY____"
The first letter is B. The others are a vowel and a double consonant.
...Are we back to this? The whole "you have to start every sentence with my opinion is"? You remember that thread, right? Everything I say is my opinion, if I tell you to "do something", you are very free not to do so.
In fact, what I was telling you "to do" is tell me what to do, if I'm your boss (seriously stop using that as a strawman), then all I'm telling you to do is be my boss, making us equals, making me not your boss. Even according to your own logic that makes no sense.
"In fact, what I was telling you "to do" is tell me what to do"
Return to topic. *evil grin*
See above post, that's me returning to the topic. Also, that was a request, not a command, in fact, I don't issue commands unless I receive clarification that I am a boss or a general or something, until then, what I say is a request.
command, request, its the exact same thing in this situation.
don't go all dictionary on me, of course their definitions are different, but here, its the EXACT same thing.
You're deciding it's the same thing, it's not.
fine, have them be different.
Now don't complain when i get angry that you misinterpret my POV.
Your only example of that so far was an example that you claim to have supposed to be the same thing, but they are not written as the same thing. Again, that is fine, you miswrote, moving on, but why are you blaming me for reading it wrong when it is written wrong?
Also, if I do misinterpret your point of view, try not to get angry instead, explain what I misunderstood and help me understand it please.
Because, the way I see it, it's not written wrong so , from my POV, there's no way someone could have gotten it wrong, yet you (and others) getting it wrong make me feel like you're complete idiots.
I may be wrong, I may be right, who gives a fuck, but right now, I have a very good feeling about my intellect and I view you as no more than illiterate buffoons.Given that this took 3 hours, less on the illiterate part, but still. I cannot help but feel i'm talking to stupid people.
And dont go saying " oh he starts insulting again", ive stated already its my opinion and i'll be soon inserting it in my lovely, smart butt hole.
My opinion is that intelligent people tend to be more open for debates because they become so knowledgeable by opening up to other people's opinions and letting theirs grow by receiving and accepting criticism. Keep in mind I started that sentence with "my opinion is".
It is written wrong if it's supposed to mean the exact same the first quote does. They don't mean the same thing. Even if you view them as a reply to my example of America because you put the term "at least" in front of it.
So we both think of eachother as complete idiots. That explains why this took 4 hours.
Also our dictionaries hate eachother.
MY DICK IS BIGGER THAN YOURS WITH AT LEAST 2 INCHES--- ohwait you're female.
MY DICK IS BIGGER THAN YOURS WITH AT LEAST 44 INCHES. Wait, you're female....Damn, I dont know other insults..
I said the same thing twice. Even if 2 inches is definitely NOT equal to 44 inches no matter how you take my dick. God, I love my puns.
No, you're not an idiot, you just get kind of blinded by your own anger. When not you're okay.
How can you still claim i'm "okay", I almost feel insulted by that....
And of course i'm not an idiot, i'm not related to you.
I don't think all idiots are related, for example, George W Bush and Paulie Shore are not related the last time I checked. I never checked to be honest and now I feel a little bad by lying to you. If that's true though it would prove my point, wouldn't it?
Who the fuck is .Paulie Shore. In less than 12 words please.
Paul Montgomery Shore is an American actor, writer, producer, director, and comedian.
all I want to do now is tell you to go fuck yourself.
Go fuck yourself, Spartacus.
Burn in Hell, motherfucker.
Oh, and Merry Christmas.
How rude, coins just gave you the explaination you wanted in 12 words exactly.
*gentleman claps for coins*
Well, he did fail to point out what made Paulie Shore relevant to what I'm saying.
All he asked was who Paul Shore actually was.
Go fuck yourself already.
True enough, but he asked it as a reply to what I said, which was a crack at Paulie Shore being a moron.
Almost all comedians are morons.
Since when is coins a comedian
I'm not, you fucking moron.
He's known for being quite the moron.
So basically the famous-in-RL version of coins.
Maybe, I don't know coins enough to judge.
coins is the most infamous troll this site has seen since TSR. Though I'd take coins any day, he grows on you.
You are a pestilence.
Hey, that's one of the four horsemen of apocalypse, that's pretty badass.
I'm also partially homophobic so try not to hit on me in public.
I wouldn't touch you with a,
Thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole!
You nauseate me,
Mr. Steve...or Greg
You're really, really pooooor!
You're as cuddly as a Russian,
You're as charming as a Jew,
Mr. Steve...or Greg.
You're a poor gypsy who got his ass hit by the dooooor!
Aww, poetry, for me, why thank you, you're so sweet <3
Oh wait, this is getting too serious, i'll just friendzone you.
Time for you to GTFO.
Your ass is so tight.... damn.....
Bill, Bass, Butt, Bell, Ball...
I suddenly hate English.
When you tell someone his opinion is wrong, you're challenging him to reflect on his own opinion and learn more about it in order to respond (unless he just shoots it down), it's very sad you don't realize this because debating can be an extremely educational process when done correctly, which is what I enjoy so much about it (and a lot of people do, so I don't see why it is so batshit insane).
You don't acknowledge someone as your superior in any way by accepting those instructions on your pov, a superior is someone you work for, someone who tells you to do something and you do it.
"When you tell someone his opinion is wrong, you're challenging him to reflect on his own opinion"
I am not competitive.
I refuse the challenge and i will be a fucking rock against the stream because I can.
And accepting someone as superior is a choice which can be reverted at any point.
Regardless of whether you refuse or not, you referred to the "challenge" (which is not a literal challenge in a competitive way, there are more uses for the word you know) as some sort of an attack or something. I just explained how that is not the case and how greatly you can benefit from it.
And I'm pretty sure the reason you're rejecting the debate now after spending so much time debating is because you realized you lost, in fact, you stopped debating a while ago and started replying with "don't care" messages instead (and again, if you truly didn't care, you wouldn't even make that reply".
Accepting someone as a superior has nothing to do with debating though, since that is very much between equals who can both present their points to one another.
I referred to this "challenge" as an attack because that's how I view it.
Explain all you want. I'll still view it that way and there's nothing you can do to change it.
And I'm not rejecting the debate. I keep spilling out my POV yet its derailed all possible ways.
And "you realized you've lost", hey, the cavalry hasnt showed up yet.So far this was barely the frontlines clashing and some basic skirmishes.
And the "accepting as superior" thing , please understand. you asked for my pov. I could have said "no". But I have decided to accept your command aka say "yes boss" and comply. Then I returned to status quo where we're all equal. And you kept acting like you were boss. Which is my no-no.
How am I acting like I'm the boss? Because I'm debating you? You do understand you're still doing that, right? We're both doing that, we're both explaining our perspectives, but you act like I'm forcing them on you, sorry if you got that impression, but that's far from what I'm doing. We've been equals throughout the entire debate (otherwise it wouldn't be a debate), you've just straw manned it to ridiculous levels like you did last time by acting angry about something that has nothing to do with the argument, and, again, I view this as a sign of you refusing to acknowledge that you've lost the debate despite the fact you have no way to reply in a contributive manner (and if you do, please do so because you haven't in a while).
"I'll still view it that way and there's nothing you can do to change it" that is quite literally rejecting the debate, I can't find any other words for it. For a debate to be truly successful, both individuals have to be open for the other's point, but that is a very clear statement that this is not the case, isn't it?
"For a debate to be truly successful, both individuals have to be open for the other's point, but that is a very clear statement that this is not the case, isn't it?"
You've won the internet.
It increases dick size too.
I can see you all the way from Romania now.
So after like, more than 2 hours, it's finally over?
I never said "you won the argument". I said "You won the internet".
aka "you finally got my point"
Your point was that you were rejecting the debate? Not according to you.
"And I'm not rejecting the debate. I keep spilling out my POV yet its derailed all possible ways. "-Steve_Greg
And you've lost the internet again.
Dude, how can you miss so hard, really, have you seen an eye doctor recently? BECAUSE YOU SHOULD.
And this wasnt sarcasm.
I have no idea what you mean, but this comment does nothing to counteract mine, so I assume you have no comment against it, making mine undisputed.
Allow me to clear it up with your own quote. I will add a word here and there to help it make sense as it gets shorter to the actual part that awarded you the internet.
"For a debate to be truly successful, both individuals have to be open for the other's point, but that is a very clear statement that this is not the case, isn't it?
" both individuals have to be open for the other's point, but that is a very clear statement that this is not the case"
" both individuals have to be open for the other's point, but ... its not the case here"
" Steve won't give up on his POV."
Yeah, I know, and? This won me the internet? Your point was I know you've closed yourself to all opinions but your own? Why haven't more people won the internet then?
Because nobody so far took 3 hours to realize it.
I realized it a long time ago, I even think I wrote it a long time ago.
You're not getting it back, you know.
IM LAUGHING SO HARD I GOT ANOTHER NOSEBLEED. I DUNNO WHY.
It's better than anger.
But maybe one day I'll get you to open your mind to other people's perspectives and profit from the knowledge the entire world can give you.
Patience is a virtue isn't it? I can wait.
Yes but you'll be older. And have back pains.
Too bad back pains isn't a virtue :)
Nope, not funny.
You're still just in an angry mood, you should try to laugh a little before you go to bed (it's really late where you are, isn't it?). It's probably not healthy to go to sleep while still in rage mode.
its 4 AM and its christmas day.
Exactly, so maybe you could considering getting calm before you go get some rest. In fact, you seem a lot calmer now.
I still want to run you over in a monster truck while raping a girl with Burzum playing in the background.
You don't mean that. That's just you trying to hold on to that anger. Let go of it.
its not anger, i'm dead serious.
I want to see the giant-ass tires crush every inch of your bones as your blood is splattered over the ground behind like a jolly shower of happiness. I want to see the terrror in your bloodshot eyes as your insides are minced and turned into a dusty mass of gore.
You are trying so much to hate, you don't have to and you shouldn't, it becomes easier to go to sleep when you're at peace. I can just see how much effort you're putting into looking like you want that. I still don't believe you though.
your lack of trust is getting on my nerves.
I thought you were already angry?
See! I told you. You were just pretending. You don't really hate me.
This was over the second he began to talk about the relevance of countries.
Wow... I was actually thinking Extreme Sex was going on and on for hours despite horrendous abrasions, multiple ejaculations, and heart failure just to see which couple would last the longest, but... I guess Israel does some extreme fucking too.
They sure do Sentinel. They sure do.
Steve_Greg, I am very pleasantly surprised. Maybe debates have been like this recently and I just haven't noticed it, but I'm very pleased that you aren't raging and namecalling and such, but you're actually representing your point in a mature way. I just want to say that even though this thread seems like a "everyone disagreeing with Steve_Greg" thing, and it sort of is, when you present your point like this instead of getting angry, it makes your point stronger...I still disagree with you, but you're closer to making your point stick than I've seen you in the past.
thanks for making me almost choke on skittles. Considering ive spent my christmas minute typing in this thread, I will forever hate it.
You're telling me, in Iceland Christmas is celebrated on the 24th instead of 25th (no one knows why, so don't ask), so I'm literally spending my Christmas evening on this thread, but I love it. You should relish in the opportunity to debate with multiple people at the same time.
Nevermind, this is unfortunately no longer the case, although he hasn't started namecalling yet so I'm very optimistic there is hope.
You're lucky its 3 AM otherwise this thread would have more Steve-produced "FUCK" than New York in a month.
So basically, you're telling me the reason you're not acting quite as immature as you once did (that's not intended to be an insult, if you take it that way, that's your problem, not mine, just like you try to make it my problem when I apparently misunderstand your words) is because you are tired. That's too bad.
So in conclusion it's been established:
Playing video games is not a sport.
Shoveling food in your mouth is not a sport.
Looking "pretty" is not a sport.
Moving little pieces on a checkered board is not a sport.
Gambling is not a sport
Sucking dick is not a sport.
And Israel is a country, but not a sport.
End of thread.
Yep. The world is wrong and I am right.
(Trolling is an art, but it's not a sport.)
You sure Israel is not a sport?
no, being massacred by everyone over the centuries is not a sport.
It is if any relevant country decides it is, right?
Ethics be involved.
Oh, we could go all night arguing what is ethical and what is not, but I'll spare you that.
That's what you get for killing baby Jesus motherfcukers!
Israel isn't a sport, but surviving as a Jew might be!
Can't argue with that.
All Israel has to do is make it official and soon we'll get Jewish olympics.
It's really just a question on which country will host it next.
China, possibly Ukraine.
Why China? XD
Because those little Chinese are always up to something.
I'd like to participate in the nose throwing and gold hiding competitions.
You'd need a nose job first buddy.
Don't you dare insult the Greekness of my nose, Juden.
You're nowhere near as Greek as I am.
Shut up Euromutt, wanna measure our Greekness in the bathrrom?
AMEEEEEEEEEEERICA THE GEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT
I don't know, the ancient Greeks valued smaller penises over larger ones...
That's cause it's the rare ones that people want :P
You're so unique, you must be female.
Okay, I'm going to make a personal note not to talk about sports on this site again. Y'all bitches be crazy.
Actually I was going to congratulate you on not only managing to create a reasonable replacement for the lost sports thread we used to have here, but also managing to get Marmotlord to post in it and rage like he did in the last one. (Though Sin helped with that)
And it was just in time for Christmas too!
A Christmash miracle indeed. Time to bring my fandom rant back? BELIEVE!
Don't make it sound like I meant for all this to happen, he already has enough hate fuel against me with the stuff he makes up.
Wait, I just remembered I hate you.
And this is how Christmas was invented guys. Have a nice break!
What are your chances of survival again?
45-70%, but given it's atypical, i'd lower it by 10%. And given it's Romania.... actually dont take country into consideration, it makes it too grim.
Oh wow, you're practically dead, in that case.
Unless your name is Darryl Dixon, you should probably go hide in a bomb shelter somewhere with a life supply of skittles and cheerios.
What are YOU, a hospital patient, going to do to ME?
He'll give you Ebola.
Oh come on, you guys are going there?
As long as the media keeps milking it. I wonder if they can milk Ebola longer than 9/11.
You sure seem unpatriotic. Are you still going for the military career?
No, I'm to be a pig that hates pigs.
I've already been accepted to a college, and I am going to major in Criminology. My goal is to become a homicide detective.
Then if I can, I'll join a criminal syndicate and/or take over America.
Watch out, we've got a politician over here.
Nice. If I immigrate to the US would you like to start a Greek mafia?
Drako...we MUST do this!
We'll destroy the country and rebuild it as a monarchy, possibly an oligarchy.
EDIT: I'll be like Alexander or Caesar (I know he's Roman) and I'll conquer the country with my brilliance and decisiveness. I will bring all of North America under my banner. Canada, and Mexico will fall to me. Then I will die, possibly due to assassination, and my empire will shatter. Only the strongest will inherit my throne.
The New Hellenistic Period.
That would take place AFTER our collapse thouhg.
Unfortunately, the ones who ignite the great change, and pave the way for it, never get to live to see its true glory.
The ones who get to see the full glory are usually the ones who fuck up and cause the fall :P
Look, an oligarchy would suck, cause I don't like to share. So, we make it a Dual Monarchy until we I (or you, dunno who strikes first) backstab you. K?
If you kill me, make sure I get shot in the torso multiple times by sniper rounds so I can go out like a badass.
Not how I'd like to go but if that's what you wish.
Actually, now that I think of it, make sure that they aren't so fatal that I can't be carried away to my bedroom where I tell my closest advisors that my heir will be "the strongest."
Unless you have a better idea?
If I had a better idea I wouldn't tell you. Instead I'd keep it for my way of going out :8
A sport is, I believe, scientifically defined as an activity in which one's performance improves as one's physical fitness improves.
Oh yeah, this thread is about sports. I totally forgot.
Drak! Where have you been?
Damn it you missed all the fun.
I can see that.
I do not concur.
Bowling and Chess are both sports. No one knows what a sport is, except the media. I almost said, "Zionist-controlled media," then thought better of it. I refer you to George Carlin's soft language blathering.
Chess is totally not a sport. It's a game. Which reminds me - you up for one?
That's actually not true. No, my brother and I are three bottles deep. Not the best chess mind, old chap.
EDIT: Well, then again, I suppose I'd have a try. I assume my atrophied and traumatized brain will prevail, to inject deflection in case I fail.
The conversation between Sin and Steve is sort of fascinating if you look at it from a certain perspective.
Steve is laying there on his death bed, angry at the world and everything because of his sickness, meanwhile Sin is looming nearby telling him to let go of his anger and to get some rest and be at peace.
Almost like he's telling Steve to stop fighting and let go of life.
Even Sin's avatar seems appropriate.
I thought YOU were the god of death.
Well I'm hanging around the thread ain't I?
Maybe it's like Hades and Thanatos, two deities that represent death within the same mythology, but serve a different purpose for it.
I'm sorry, but I have to correct everyone who makes that mistake
HADES IS THE UNDERWORLD
PLUTONAS IS THE RULER (GOD) OF THE UNDERWORLD
Damn Latins, bastardising my heathenry.
The dead gather in the underworld, making Hades the keeper of the dead, correct?
And what is Thanatos? Is he not part of this? I don't know greek mythology as well as norse mythology so you'll pardon me.
He's Death itself, while Hades is, like you said, keeper of the dead.
Yeah, I thought as much.
Wait, aren't you supposed to be that troll guy?
You mean coins? Yes he is. He even said it himself.
Death (Thanatos) is just death humanised. Young looking man picking up people, bring them, well, death. Not really important as a figure.
Hades is just the collection of the underworld where the dead go. If that makes it "the keeper of the dead" to you then so be it, lol.
I think though that by Thanatos you actually mean Xaron, who was the rower.
He was the reason coins (not the guy, the currency) were placed on the eyes of the dead, wasn't he?
Xaron? Yup. Dunno why he needed the money though since he was always busy moving people.
The interesting part from my point of view is that this may as well be the last mark of Marmot on this world (which it ain't, you are gonna live faggot)... and it's about raging over Israel's recognition.
I see you've contracted Sin, then. Or do Mexican Gods of Death not do their own soul collection?
Hey even the Death God contracted the Eternal.
Anyway, Sin can enjoy his new trophy.
Thanks, be honest, is it for the series or is it actually for this thread?
A little from column A and a little from column B.
Motherfucker.....I AINT GIVIN UP YOU FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT, YOU HEAR ME?
Im turning off the laptop right now.
Good night, sweet prick, and flights of assholes sing thee to thy rest.
I don't know, what is love?
Baby don't hurt me...
Holy shit how did I miss this thread! Ooooh it's like Christmas all over again!