|
Why is forcing women to watch you masturbate a thing that people do?
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 06:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:I'm legitimately surprised Matt Taibbi didn't show up on that list. The 90's in Russia was insane. As long as you didn't gently caress with the rich people pillaging the country, you could do whatever the gently caress you wanted. Did Taibbi ever write a book about The eXile? It's such a bizarre paper. Work Friend Keven posted:It's cool that there's like actual rapists on that list and nothings going to happen to any of them because the whole thing is an extremely politicized airing of grudges at this point Media seems like such a cesspool these days. I know the politics makes it so none of these outlets can admit they are employing bad people but hopefully it starts scaring the poo poo out of them and others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
Cool Buff Man posted:He used to stalk goon women and his wife once threw a coffee mug at his head for it, so that seems about right He's a shithead but I think this wound up not being true?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
MourningView posted:He's a shithead but I think this wound up not being true? It came from the person he was harassing. Well, the stalking part anyways, the mug part I seem to remember being added by someone else (this was nearly a decade ago) but that's not really the important thing. He was/is a real loving creep. He even freaked me out once by tracking me down on another site and asking me about my life and all sorts of weird poo poo that I didn't feel like sharing with him, so I can't imagine what it was like to be subjected to his attention as a woman Cool Buff Man fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Oct 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
he may not be a homicidal maniac but he still loving sucks
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Anyone who made their name on Helldump can't be well adjusted
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Cool Buff Man posted:It came from the person he was harassing. Well, the stalking part anyways, the mug part I seem to remember being added by someone else (this was nearly a decade ago) but that's not really the important thing. He was/is a real loving creep. He even freaked me out once by tracking me down on another site and asking me about my life and all sorts of weird poo poo that I didn't feel like sharing with him, so I can't imagine what it was like to be subjected to his attention as a woman I just meant the mug thing but yeah he's a creep that wasn't meant as a defense at all
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
MourningView posted:I just meant the mug thing but yeah he's a creep that wasn't meant as a defense at all The mug thing is one of things that just makes a situation better from all sides so I choose to believe it from this point onwards.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
This is a very sad but very worthwhile read: https://twitter.com/PlayersTribune/status/924955300695871488
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
In 2011, Joe Buck attempted to recreate Randy Moss' controversial 2005 touchdown celebration at Lambeau, with me as a stand-in for the goalpost.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Only tangentially sports related but Joe Ricketts just shut down and completely wiped the archives of DNAInfo and Gothamist plus all their sister sites because the writers voted to unionize. I don't even read those frequently but I hope he chokes on vomit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
It's hosed up and I hope bad things happen to him, is what I have to say about that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
http://www.theringer.com/platform/amp/nfl/2017/11/3/16602312/blake-bortles-name-week-9-picks-mailbag-bill-simmons This has gotta be one of the stupidest column premises I’ve ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:http://www.theringer.com/platform/amp/nfl/2017/11/3/16602312/blake-bortles-name-week-9-picks-mailbag-bill-simmons This is badass
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:http://www.theringer.com/platform/amp/nfl/2017/11/3/16602312/blake-bortles-name-week-9-picks-mailbag-bill-simmons Wrong, this is good
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:http://www.theringer.com/platform/amp/nfl/2017/11/3/16602312/blake-bortles-name-week-9-picks-mailbag-bill-simmons This column is good, and true One of Bill's best ever EDIT: until he took shots at Gordies in hockey, that is some bullshit, Simmons
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
That was good Simmons . At some point, I realized my half-assed Googling was verging on Gladwellian territory, so I called the man himself, Malcolm Gladwell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
The only bad thing about that column is the presence of Gladwell
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Thats perfect sims baby! hell yeah
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Feels Villeneuve posted:This is badass Agreed, this is actually insanely good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
It was actually changed to Bortles at Ellis Island from Bortowtiz
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Feels Villeneuve posted:The only bad thing about that column is the presence of Gladwell The entire column was a Gladwell piece. It could’ve been in Outliers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Lol Clay Travis is trying to punch outside of his weight class https://twitter.com/tanehisicoates/status/927561892444254208 https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/927574919982002177 https://twitter.com/tanehisicoates/status/927577443241570304
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Lol Clay Travis is trying to punch outside of his weight class From one of the replies: Willful ignorance is a drug and Clay is El Chapo
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
I liked Shelby Foote 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
When did "no it was states rights" become "that tyrant Lincoln could have just compromised" because that seems even more wilfully ignorant
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Yeah, if the question is "do the states have a right to dissolve the union?", I can respect either argument, but you really have to come down on one side or the other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
In general I think States should have the rights to secede if they so desire. Just don't bullshit around the reason why those states wanted to secede.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Is this the thread for this hot take https://deadspin.com/ornery-columnist-snacks-in-youth-sports-are-making-ame-1796759986
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:Is this the thread for this hot take yessssss this was great
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
General Dog posted:Yeah, if the question is "do the states have a right to dissolve the union?", I can respect either argument, but you really have to come down on one side or the other. To go into more detail than is really necessary for the Sports Journalism Tumblr thread, Ta-Nehisi isn't entirely correct. On the issue of slavery there basically is no room to compromise on the morality of it. You can believe slavery is right, or you believe slavery is wrong, so this argument that the Civil War is a failure of compromise is pretty ridiculous. However, there is a pretty important legal dimension to this which sometimes gets overlooked. The abolitionists may have wanted an immediate end to slavery, but there was no legal mechanism to do so. Slaves were the property of their owner, and the constitution protects your property rights. The government can't take away your property except for under very specific circumstances. So there was a compromise favored by Lincoln and others that they saw as a practical way to end slavery. Basically they favored a compensated emancipation. The government would free all of the slaves, but pay the slave owners for them. It's possible that this sort of compromise could have led to an end of slavery and prevented the civil war. But, each side was so entrenched on the argument of the morality that I don't think it's realistic a compromised settlement ever could have been reached.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
Simplex posted:To go into more detail than is really necessary for the Sports Journalism Tumblr thread, Ta-Nehisi isn't entirely correct. On the issue of slavery there basically is no room to compromise on the morality of it. You can believe slavery is right, or you believe slavery is wrong, so this argument that the Civil War is a failure of compromise is pretty ridiculous. However, there is a pretty important legal dimension to this which sometimes gets overlooked. The abolitionists may have wanted an immediate end to slavery, but there was no legal mechanism to do so. Slaves were the property of their owner, and the constitution protects your property rights. The government can't take away your property except for under very specific circumstances. Lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Simplex posted:To go into more detail than is really necessary for the Sports Journalism Tumblr thread, Ta-Nehisi isn't entirely correct. On the issue of slavery there basically is no room to compromise on the morality of it. You can believe slavery is right, or you believe slavery is wrong, so this argument that the Civil War is a failure of compromise is pretty ridiculous. However, there is a pretty important legal dimension to this which sometimes gets overlooked. The abolitionists may have wanted an immediate end to slavery, but there was no legal mechanism to do so. Slaves were the property of their owner, and the constitution protects your property rights. The government can't take away your property except for under very specific circumstances.  "Entrenched on the argument of Morality"
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
I'm going to make this simple for you since you have trouble understanding complicated things. Person A: I think slavery is bad Person B: I think slavery is good No room for compromise. Person A: I'm going to pay you to free your slaves, or I'm going to shoot you and free your slaves Plenty of room for compromise. If all you do is argue over whether slavery is good or bad, 9 times out of 9 there is no resolution except for a fight. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
lmao
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
I don't know if all the supporting facts about what the abolitionists wanted are correct, but if they are I think it's a reasonable argument. At risk of pushing us further astray, it would be like people saying now that all guns need to be confiscated by the government with no restitution for the owners. It would be a non-starter. It's not a perfect analogy since anything to do with guns whatsoever is a non-starter, but the same was probably true of slaves so maybe it is. I dunno, stop making fun of him, I see what he's saying. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
Oh no
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 23:24
|
|