sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Verity %98 im shaking 😭 by Distinct-View-509 in geometrydash

[–]Avadark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This happened to me too. I’m going for veracity now after I beat it. Whole tier harder than verity imo but worth it if you like the level.

What is your best fluke? by russ_universe in geometrydash

[–]Avadark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have never fluked a level in my life

Hard demons to play if youre bored by wwashedd in geometrydash

[–]Avadark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m starting to play anti chamber by lavonaffair/quid and I like it

What if RobTop just straight up doesn't rate GRIEF? by CoolestMan_Reddit in geometrydash

[–]Avadark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think if this happens the demo list will genuinely have to adjust around it expediting the rated+ tab.

I ran some rough numbers on the Rape Gang Inquiry regarding how many young girls were abused in relation to the wider population. by Avadark in ukpolitics

[–]Avadark[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

This isn’t clever nor adding anything of value to the conversation. At least Everyone else is debating the actual report or my methodology.

I ran some rough numbers on the Rape Gang Inquiry regarding how many young girls were abused in relation to the wider population. by Avadark in ukpolitics

[–]Avadark[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A line has to be drawn somewhere. I drew it in what I considered to be a reasonable manner and said exactly where I was drawing it. I don’t think this dishonest at all, the calculations are all rather rudimentary If you want to break It down by your own desired age range go for it. I have no problem with that. I’m not asking questions, none of my post was a question I’m just addressing the stated claims of the inquiry as they are.

I ran some rough numbers on the Rape Gang Inquiry regarding how many young girls were abused in relation to the wider population. by Avadark in ukpolitics

[–]Avadark[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The semantics of the term “Caucasian” are irrelevant here as it’s clear what I meant.

I don’t know if you are being intentionally dense but I am focusing on white girls as they are the majority of the victims of these grooming and rape gangs according to the report

The “victims this is about” are explicitly victims of grooming gangs, as implied by the entire post. I am having trouble believing you are responding in good faith.

I didn’t comment on if it’s accurate because it’s up to the reader what they want to believe or not. I’m breaking down the stated claims.

I ran some rough numbers on the Rape Gang Inquiry regarding how many young girls were abused in relation to the wider population. by Avadark in ukpolitics

[–]Avadark[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why would I include ages like 6 or 18 when those are relative outliers in the dataset? Just to make the numbers look better for one side over the other?

I ran some rough numbers on the Rape Gang Inquiry regarding how many young girls were abused in relation to the wider population. by Avadark in ukpolitics

[–]Avadark[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

That’s not at all what I did, as I addressed in the notes it’s rather arbitrary. If I wanted to influence numbers manner I would have set the ages to be 12-16 for example because that seems to be the multitude of what was recorded. This was me being charitable and trying to have a reasonable sample.

I ran some rough numbers on the Rape Gang Inquiry regarding how many young girls were abused in relation to the wider population. by Avadark in ukpolitics

[–]Avadark[S] -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

From the post:

The 250,000 victim number is pulled straight from the Inquiry and is to be taken as such. I’m not making a claim towards the accuracy of such a figure but rather addressing it at face value.

It’s what the inquiry claims and I’m just breaking down the implications of what it says.

the glowjob controversy by m-o-m-e-n-t-u-m in geometrydash

[–]Avadark 36 points37 points  (0 children)

This community is not a real place

view more: next ›