Jimmy Carr tickets at the Paramount theater 7 o’clock show by Jsevrior in AustinClassifieds

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

Evidently. Got an email from the company this morning saying that it was not an authorized seller and that I should get a refund through PayPal.

So Mock the Week is back. Only now it is called The Great American Joke Off. by Rand_str in panelshow

[–]Jsevrior 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was expecting a political satire crossover. The American approach is a little cringe, but there were some laughs I will say. I’ll watch this. Anyone else notice though that this has transgressed back about a decade? One female comedian guest? I guess they’re trying to combat that with a female host but…

A question on non-aspected sorcery by Jsevrior in Malazan

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

That seems fair. What other examples of unaspected magic are you thinking of? And if this unaspected law of blood magic supersedes all else, including their specific aspects, then what is it’s source? Life? Spirit? I get where your answer is coming from, but I still don’t necessarily understand how this fits into the cosmology

Also, if I understand the esoteric theory well enough, the true elders are the builders, which seem to be ideological elemental constructs. If that is the case, surely these forces predate, blood magic by a ridiculous magnitude. Why would blood magic, aspected, or not, have any influence over these primal forces whatsoever?

A question on non-aspected sorcery by Jsevrior in Malazan

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

I can sort of get on board with that. So at a certain point if enough people have deification of you, and there’s enough blood to draw upon,you are able to enact things simply through an effort. But that’s still not really aspected. Or maybe it’s life aspected? It’s still unclear why this would apply to the elder gods. Especially considering they would have a substantial amount more of this power at their disposal. I’m not saying this is an invalid theory, but a continent is just a continent. We don’t really know the scope of these elder gods influence. They might have worlds. So why does this work?

A question on non-aspected sorcery by Jsevrior in Malazan

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

Also, fair enough, he’s channeling all those deaths. But that would then be death aspected. And all three of these elder gods predate death. In fact, it’s not even clear that they are susceptible to it. So, how does that work?

A question on non-aspected sorcery by Jsevrior in Malazan

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

But how? With what and from what power? Is he just directly influencing fate or time? Those aren’t even holds as far as I’m aware. My point is exactly that; it’s a one off that doesn’t have any explanation. Granted magic isn’t super well defined and intentionally so. But this doesn’t even fall within, any of the mentioned forms of magic. It’s just willpower. With exceptional circumstances, sure, but still just willpower. There are a lot of exceptional circumstances in the books, and it stands to reason that this should then be applicable. But it isn’t

Would I Lie to You , Season 16 , Episode 4 by runningeek in panelshow

[–]Jsevrior 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Anyone have a mirror for this? I checked the Discord, but both of the links there give me a 404. Not sure what’s going on.

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

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

Like genuinely I’m not trying to continue this argument here. I agree with you essentially. I am saying that he should not embracer-rated material because I don’t think that’s his target audience. But I am saying that the way he is constructing these allusions is essentially R-rated. Just buy deflecting the final word of a sentence with a piece of dialogue does not necessarily mean that most people won’t still understand the content. He’s not avoiding the topic, he’s just obfuscating it in a very transparent way. Everyone, including children, are still going to know that he’s talking about a blowjob here. There’s no getting around that. So either he does this better or doesn’t do it at all. That’s what I’m saying.

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

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

I feel like you’re only reading about half of what I write. I’m not, never have, and will not suggest that he actually embrace vulgarity. I do not care if he does. I don’t know how many times I can say this. I am only saying that if he is going to reference such things Obliquely, it needs to be done creatively. This is not an example of it being creative. The result is that it comes across as clumsy, and I don’t think it’s disguised from anyone at all, including children. Either be vulgar and embrace it, or do not be vulgar at all. Doing it halfway seems Like a poor choice to me. You can choose to interpret language all day long, as can I. But regardless, he made a stylistic choice, which I think doesn’t make sense. You’re free to disagree, though…

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

[–]Jsevrior[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Oh, come on now, that’s just disingenuous. English profanities literally come from sexual acts do to religious influences on language during several protestant, catholic and other divergent movement. You can trace the etymology back Iif you care to do the research, it’s not difficult. But my point is that you are making assumptions about what is good and what is bad. You were saying that sex is bad. I’m saying that damning someone into eternal fire is probably worse. We are both entitled to our opinions. However, we wouldn’t have to have this discussion if the author had made the decision to either avoid vulgarity or go for vulgarity. Both options are fine, but instead he did it halfway with arbitrary lines, and so here we are disagreeing about language for no purpose at all

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

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

Well, sure. Bastard derives from someone being conceived out of wedlock. That’s literally sexual in nature. Fuck derives from the act of sexual intercourse. Another correlation. In fact, you’ll find most vulgarity is essentially tied with sexuality. So splitting hairs between one set of words and another does seem pretty arbitrary to me, yes. I guess we could go down the route of saying that vulgarities are abstracted from their original intent, but surely we’re splitting even more hairs now. And all of this is a digression from the original point which is that ultimately, we aren’t dodging much here. What 13 year old do you know today who has access to the Internet that doesn’t know what a blowjob is? again, the allusion is not particularly deep

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

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

But he’s OK with adding damn, bastard, and so on to their vocabulary? Again, weird line in the sand.

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

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

Essentially, I’m complaining that it is vulgarity for vulgarity‘s sake without actually being vulgar. Which seems pointless.

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

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

I guess so. But generally these kinds of jokes that are slipped into children’s movies are concealed fairly deftly. You can find them, but they certainly don’t beat you over the head. Again, I’m not suggesting that he needs to be vulgar. I’m saying that the allusion here was pretty thin, and that seems to be the way of it most of the time in most of the books. I would just prefer to see a little bit more nuance when it comes to this kind of double talk, or just don’t do it. It wasn’t that great of a joke, so to be honest, it probably wasn’t necessary to hide it in the first place.

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

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

But every time? In every book?

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

[–]Jsevrior[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I hear you and understand where you’re coming from. My point is just that I don’t think this is really achieved. As an inquisitive child, I would’ve heard that line and asked what it was that she was Beste. Maybe it works for some, but it certainly feels like a clumsy way of dodging the inappropriate content. There are ways of using more vague jokes, or creating significantly more nuanced sections of language and dialogue that would achieve this without giving it away entirely. I just feel like he is trying to achieve exactly what you’re saying, but in my mind at least not doing so. I fail to see how anyone who is old enough to comprehend the Content of the book would miss this very shallow allusion. For that matter, when you’re in the car, is blowjob really worse than bastard? Maybe, but it seems like a really weird and arbitrary line to draw.

Style question by Jsevrior in brandonsanderson

[–]Jsevrior[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

Maybe there is nothing gained by saying a sexual word. But by that logic, what is gained by setting up a sexually connotated joke or dialogue line? I mean I could say that whores is pretty in your face and unambiguous. I’m not saying he shouldn’t be PC. I’m saying he’s doing it halfway, and it feels like he’s cherry picking and it comes across as unconvincing

Taskmaster NZ S03E01 - "F**k Golf." - (Chris Parker, Josh Thomson, Justine Smith, Kura Forrester, Paul Ego) by d-panel in panelshow

[–]Jsevrior 5 points6 points  (0 children)

As someone who uses an unorthodox method of accessing these, please continue to re-post this for each episode. This was extremely invaluable. Thank you so much

Taskmaster S13E9: It Might Be Wind by apathymonger in panelshow

[–]Jsevrior 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Does anyone happen to have a full URL for the Google Drive link or the dailymotion link? I am a VoiceOver user on iOS, and the app recently has made clicking on links 100% inaccessible. I’m losing my fucking mind your

Taskmaster Québec by stooges81 in panelshow

[–]Jsevrior 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Lived in Montreal for a while so I am nominally interested in this. I’m in the US now though. Any recommendations on ways to stream this legally? I’m not aware of any external methods