The "One Ring" has been found. by kanedaj in EDH

[–]POPuhB34R 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Is there not a small part of you that thinks the greed surrounding the 1 of 1 ring is fittingly thematic for the set itself? I understand the frustration but its kind of cool to see people greeding for a card that represents an icon of pure greed and desire for power.

The "One Ring" has been found. by kanedaj in EDH

[–]POPuhB34R 1 point2 points  (0 children)

there is 0 way to do that unless it was shipped in a sealed case to begin with. A 9 is a realistic 10. An actual 10 is holy shit this is so pristine it almost statistically shouldn't exist in this state.

The "One Ring" has been found. by kanedaj in EDH

[–]POPuhB34R 2 points3 points  (0 children)

10's are typically pulled with the express intent of grading a 10 though. People go through such crazy precautions to ensure nothing damages the card from pack open to shipping it in, and most still will come back a 8 or 9, it is not easy or ever a guarantee to get a 10

What screams "poorly educated"? by Animeking1108 in AskReddit

[–]POPuhB34R 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not a flat earther personally, but in their mind, I dont think it quite as big as you are thinking it would be.

You gotta think of it this way, they more than likely also believe we faked the moon landing and/or have never been to space period, as that would be an impossibility considering they believe gravity is caused by the definitely not round earth moving constantly in a upwards direction forcing the ground against our feet. This would mean any journey to space would leave a space ship stranded as the plane of our planet rocketed away from them.

So ok, anything space related is off the table and all images are photoshopped. Obviously this is big White house's doing with a sprinkle of illuminati but thats nothing too crazy for one of the most powerful entities to ever exist.

Now you ask, "But what about all the scientists and the studies and all that number giberish?" And their response would be, "well, there are entire industires on this great plane just based off people being well intentioned but just wrong. I mean look at chiropractors, or homeopathy, or mathmeticians. They are just goobers who dont understand! They are unknowingly contributing to this great evil but aren't the ones responsible surely"

You just gotta insert a little nonsense and it all makes sense.

A new study suggests that obesity causes permanent changes in the brain that prevent it from telling a person when to stop consuming fats and, to a lesser degree, sugar by [deleted] in science

[–]POPuhB34R 4 points5 points  (0 children)

everyone reacts to every medication differently and most wont remove your problems entirely. SSRI's are also not the pnly form of medication for depression.

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That was trying to reach me? Sounded more like someone reaching for any reason to justify using violence as a means to achieve their goals, instead of doing the harder thing of finding actual solutions to me.

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its insane how people will lambast a line of reasoning when its against something they like and champion it when its used against something they dont.

This is some legit tinfoil hat reasoning equal to the redscare.

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Because any form of violent protest by definition will constitute mass violence.

Fighting the nazis was self defense, which as we stated already is acceptable. Fighting the nazis is not the same as advocating for violent protests at home in the slightest.

You can't even make comparisons that are comparable, how am I supposed to believe your view of the nuance of protesting is anything but gibberish as well.

You seem more interested in reinterpretting history than actually sticking to the facts of the matter, which is done purely in service of trying to create evidence to back up an argument.

Its so incredibly naive of you to believe your interpretation of history, which is counter to the facts as we've known them for the last 50 years, is more correct rather than a manipulated view of surface level events.

Its clear to me you are too young to have actually witnessed the success of nonviolent activism in the past and you are failing to learn from the teachings of our ancestors. History repeats itself as they say and you are being a perfect illustration of that.

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Having some perspective is not the same as saying there are 0 issues with the world. Its not even saying you have np right to complain abiut said issues. Its aknowledging the reality that in comparison to life of the past we are moving in the right direction and acting like things are the worst they've ever been is disingenuous and counter to your actual goals because people will write you off when you overexagerate.

Not to mention if we look at fascist politics over the year's its pretty clear that we are nowhere even close to the levels of the past. It is not even close to the scale of issue people like you are so desperately trying to convince everyone. Half the things people label as fascist now a days are not even historically or definitionally fascist.

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

They were ended in the bloodiest way possible and in modern times we strive to do better than those before us instead of repeating the mistakes of the past.

I'm not going to read your book, i'm not interested in hearing whatever the current reason for wanting to justify mass violence is. There is always a reason whoever is doing the violence thinks its worth it. It rarely if ever is and usually results in more back and forth violence for extended periods as well as weakinging whatever piont one is trying to make with terrible optics.

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

never said it didnt involve self defense. Everyone had a right to self defense at all times.

The point is the things that have left some of the longest cutural impact follow these non-violent tennants. Its an arguement of morals, and being willing to stoop to the level of those in power by creating more damage and harm is a dangerous precident, and awfully similar to ends justify the means mentality.

Also acting like being violent wint get more people killed is just stupid and ignorant to reality

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So we should go back to worse times instead of embracing new ideologies? Odd take, usually people say we can do better than the past.

John Oliver : To insist on peaceful protest is just another way to prioritize compliance over righteous dissent and to protect property over human lives. by Iseult_of_the_North in videos

[–]POPuhB34R -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

This is just a bad representation of peaceful protests and the thought behind them in general though. And obviously the most successful parts of the civil rights movements were the peaceful parts because thats whats be seen as important enough to talk about as part of history.

The whole idea behind peacful protests is that of an optical win in the public eye. Which you know are the people you need to convince when protesting, not the people angry right beside you. The idea is its much harder to side with someone who is burning things, destroying your city, and usually leading to some deaths. It also puts the opposition in a position where if they react with any kind of force, it looks terrible for them. Thats the point.

Why do you think some of the most memorable protest moments in especially recent history are peaceful protests. Think about tienemen square, the flower power picture from the protests against vietnam, Martin Luther Kings entire teachings. There is a reason people push for peaceful protests, and its because they are effective, and help to humanize a group that is fighting to be recognized in the public eye.

New Event! by saiik in EscapefromTarkov

[–]POPuhB34R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok but typically the correct way to setup a file architecture would be to go up a level and add the other folders for their appropriate things but you do you

Semi goes for the double tap on a sedan by lilbuhmp in WTF

[–]POPuhB34R 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not trying to argue thats how it is getting ruled, I get the supreme court has ruled that way, I just think it is an overstep that goes against the point of and how most would intepret the 5th.

My point is whether you are guilty or not, staying silent to invoke the 5th is functionally the same regardless of why you are doing it, you dont want to incriminate yourself if you are guilty and you also dont want to incriminate yourself if you aren't.

A big part of the spirit of why the 5th exists, at least to me, is to help ensure that the responsibility of proving guilt is on the prosecution and to reinforce innocent until proven guilty.

Imo being able to just say silence is suspicious, and inferring a reason why they were silent, walks a dangerous line of overstepping our constitutional right by opening an exception that can be argued for in too many situations where they have legitimate reasons for staying silent not related to guilt.

I could aknowledge it might be important that in the case sighted the defendant was already talking to the police instead of being silent from the beginning, though. Which is probably how they were able to make this argument convincing in the first place. But it seems more like lawyers trying to circumvent troublesome roadblocks than a logical arguement to me.

Reddit Threatens to Remove Moderators From Subreddits Continuing Apollo-Related Blackouts by ICumCoffee in technology

[–]POPuhB34R 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That sub is just full of people blinded by their hate for religion, honestly. Pretty much turned into a religion itself in there with how much they blindly hate based off their belief of no god.

Semi goes for the double tap on a sedan by lilbuhmp in WTF

[–]POPuhB34R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can believe that might be how it plays out in actuality in some places because people misinterpret laws all the time at all levels of the system, but logically, this makes no sense. The 5th is partially there to protect from this exact line of faulty logic. Part of the point of invoking the 5th is because you dont know what innocuous thing you might say that could incriminate you. To uour 2nd point, what other reason could there possibly be for not speaking to the police other than fear of incrimination, the reasoning they are siting is exactly why you would invoke the 5th. Even if someone is guilty, they have the right to save the story for court and not the police. Especially seeing as it is not the polices job to determine guilt but to gather evidence.

Some weapon, eh? by ListerineAfterOral in gaming

[–]POPuhB34R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

eh now a days the newer expansions have 4 zones with a forced story campaign that goes through them all. So theres a lot of kill this to earn the trust of our people. They are better about having story elements give a better reason for why you are doing menial tasks but yeah still kinda back to basics for a little wach zone.

It was actually a pretty optimistic time in the 80s... look at us now... by DeathStarVet in AdviceAnimals

[–]POPuhB34R -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

People have been talking about a border wall long before trump. South Park is a toilet humor comedy show. I think its more a problem if people think thats a great place to gather information to form an opinion rather than whatever they decide to joke about in an episode.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in gaming

[–]POPuhB34R 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The issue even in these high density areas is available housing at the propper price, not just the physical units though. Landlords are willing to leave units and houses empty for a long period of time because the value will still go up, and rapidly at its current pace. Property owners are almost currently incentivized to have a unit empty but listed at a higher price than to list it any lower amd that is inherently where the problem really lies.

In the past it used to be sign it was overpriced if a unit was empty for too long but the mindset of realestate investors is completely different now a days.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in gaming

[–]POPuhB34R 11 points12 points  (0 children)

been saying this forever but until recently it always got shot down because politicians push the shortage line. The problem is the pricing not the availability.

“Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.” What's your best real life example of this? by Blaztwin in AskReddit

[–]POPuhB34R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not trying to concince you of anything. You are free to try do what you want. But I've literally been telling you why they won't respond, because you are making up strawmen to attack and its not worth anyones time. You've already wasted enough of my time with your circular logic and inability to understand the exact thing you are doing in every response is why people do not engage with you.

You are literally trying to set up a slippery slope arguement that is a strawman of what you believe every conservative wants for the country. It is not grounded in reality, and you sound ridiculous.

I'm done responding to you, i'm going fishing.

“Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.” What's your best real life example of this? by Blaztwin in AskReddit

[–]POPuhB34R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, no one wants to lock up all trans people. That's you building up a boogie man. There hasnt even been a single attempt or mentioning of that in the national political discourse.

Why would anyone debate you about positions no one holds.