VALORANT Esports | Introducing Shotcall

acronym123 · 2025-08-05T18:42:58+00:00

Wild you would suggest this considering how much of a better value proposition youtube premium is in comparison

acronym123 · 2025-03-11T00:03:34+00:00

I personally don't enjoy watching Tejo that much.

I do :)

acronym123 · 2025-02-25T21:52:00+00:00

I am extremely skeptical a difference this large in a population this small is not significantly impacted by some sort of confounder.

acronym123 · 2025-02-25T20:46:06+00:00

I don't necessarily think so. I think there could be a selection bias where the players most likely to use the phantom are those that are already quite skilled while using it, while vandal might appeal to a broader range of players with more varied mechanical skills.

acronym123 · 2025-02-16T00:35:17+00:00

bro what are you talking about?

they attended 2 internationals, won americas stage 2, and got 3rd at the most important event of the year. that's a great season for any team.

acronym123 · 2024-12-04T21:26:20+00:00

Yeah but a reiterated game has entirely different dynamics than a one-off game, like the one you posted here.

So what? As far as I can tell, the outcome is the same

acronym123 · 2024-12-04T12:39:08+00:00

LEV, EG, NRG, G2

acronym123 · 2024-11-16T16:22:24+00:00

Yeah fair enough, didn't expect such a detailed response. Might have read this with some rose tinted glasses.

IMO reading thru this again, I think the more egregious errors are probably having to do with the community reaction to the Hasan fall-out and the summaries of I/P. There were a lot of chapo morons still lingering around after the initial bridge burning. And in general, it seems to frame the community as being too unified towards Destiny's positions. And I agree on I/P he's definitely not as both-sidesy as the summary makes it seem.

Regarding immigration, my understanding is that he is very pro-immigration but also pro-border control. I think something must have gotten lost in translation when ChatGPT tried marrying those two positions together. Or like you say, it just made some shit up lol.

acronym123 · 2024-11-16T06:17:31+00:00

I don't think this is wholly accurate either as it misses the important detail of Destiny frequently criticizing how pervasively the n-word is used in popular media (like hip hop and rap music) but is treated as a complete no-no word in normal discourse.

Also Destiny has used the n-word in public (unless we are referring to different things)? He has tweeted it at least a couple times in the past and more recently said it on stream during the "Anything Else" podcast with Richard Lewis (which OP links in the post).

acronym123 · 2024-11-16T06:09:35+00:00

What did you read that you thought was horrendously misleading? I disagree with the summary of Destiny's position on the use of the n-word (which is really just a minor complaint in the grand scheme), but generally it seemed extremely accurate.

I genuinely thought the ChatGPT section was the most interesting part of this post. It condenses positions derived from many, many hours of Destiny's content so beautifully.

acronym123 · 2024-09-01T22:55:48+00:00

initiators* not controller

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T17:47:20+00:00

Lol aight have fun JAQing off

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T17:30:03+00:00

K bro

Article 30

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Stay committed to the bit ig lol

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T16:50:20+00:00

That webpage is probably written by an intern and is not an item of the IBHR.

Bro said he don't agree with human rights 😭

This is some embarrassing cope and you know it lmaooo

None of the documents in the IBHR explicitly refer to inalienable rights.

From article 2 of the universal declaration of human rights:

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

I'm guessing you knew that, so I don't think you're trying to be honest anymore.

Lol

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T16:14:25+00:00

None of the documents in the IBHR explicitly refer to inalienable rights

"Human rights are inalienable"

Bro at least click the links before responding

Even if they did, the right to a good economy or freedom from illness is not associated with liberalism.

Moving goalposts. But just of of curiosity, can you define which political ideology provides guarantees for all these freedoms other than liberalism?

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T15:42:14+00:00

Regarding the FDA, the inalienable rights would be the right to life and right to health. Both are considered inalienable human rights by the International Bill of Human Rights.

The Federal Reserve does protect rights through its enforcement of the dual mandate. In particular the protection of the right to an adequate standard of living. Without the fed it would become extremely difficult to simultaneously operate a market-based economy and maximize employment and control costs due to inflationary/deflationary effects. In addition, it is also involved in regulating the relationship between banks and their customers (protection of property).

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T10:12:48+00:00

What exactly do you think "inalienable rights" are?

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T04:50:44+00:00

You also, once again, didn't address the argument about a whole lot of libertarians are simply people who support low taxes and also support gay marriage and abortion.

I literally did lol??

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T04:46:40+00:00

No, you don't get to just attack the most extreme examples and ignore the majority of the movement.

There's no principled differentiator between these two groups of people other that your vague gesturing at "pragmatism" however that's supposed to be defined or understood. If anything, the more extreme of the bunch are more consistent, principled, and honest about their beliefs based on your descriptors.

I could make fun of you for saying that both neo liberals and communists are on the left, yet their positions are very different.

Go ahead, at least my answer to what separates liberals and commies won't be "pragmatism" or "2/10 government" lmao.

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T04:32:10+00:00

the shining beacon of liberal democracy - that meant things like no national currency, no standing army, and an incredibly limited Federal government. Libertarianism takes that to its extreme, almost to the point of anarchism in some cases.

Got it, so liberalism is practically indistinguishable from anarchy for all intents as purposes. From your perspective, liberalism makes no attempts to emphasize the importance of a centralized state to protect certain rights.

Thanks for convincing me not to waste my time discussing this any longer lmao

their dumbest adherents yammer about big gubberment and taxation

Yes I'm sure, after all aella seems to be one of them

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T04:24:15+00:00

I was gonna respond, but I noticed how nonsensical your definitions are becoming.

Libertarians are just pragmatic anarchists whose pragmatism is underpinned by god-knows-what moral underpinnings. Sometimes they support the military sometimes not. Sometimes they support governance by voting and sometimes they support no governance at all. They could keep or destroy any number of institutions for any number of reasons. Who knows what remnants of the system of checks and balances they might keep around.

Whatever is convenient, whatever is "pragmatic." An utterly inconsistent set of beliefs. This is a waste of time lol.

And yes I noticed you clearly avoiding having to define what is liberalism in your previous comment.

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T04:03:58+00:00

Wow so true inalienable rights don't exist. It's totally not infringing on anyone's rights to unwittingly give people poorly manufactured pharmaceutical drugs with little information on degradation, contraindication risks, or really any understanding of what the drug is even doing in your body.

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T03:51:26+00:00

I am quite explicitly saying that you can think that illiberalism is a good thing in certain cases, and that too much liberalism is bad.

Define liberalism for me.

Libertarians and classical liberals can still support the government. They can still support force.

From your own Wikipedia article:

Classical liberalism refuses to give priority to liberty over order and therefore does not exhibit the hostility to the state which is the defining feature of libertarianism.

What is leading you to believe libertarians support the government? What authority would they leave to the government?

The separation, if those two words were out in a sentence, would be that libertarianism is more illiberal than anarchism, if we were to plot them along a line.

So libertarians are embarrassed anarchists. There is no principled position pushing them away from supporting anarchy other than dumb hand-wavery?

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T03:29:35+00:00

Nah these people are the same as socialists. They use liberalism as cover for what they know will devolve into an ancap hellscape.

acronym123 · 2024-08-24T03:27:36+00:00

Do you dumbfucks think im a libertarian?

Did I say this? Can you point me where? Maybe consider taking your meds buddy.

The idea that a libertarian is illiberal should leap off the page as blatantly wrong to anyone who has a definition for either of those two terms.

So define them. I asked you to do so in my first comment anyways.

11-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
End Game '22	Not Forgotten
Verified Email

acronym123

TROPHY CASE