Little things that annoy the hell out of you

[drauch]

Yep, I think we got too risque for off-topic. You know, talking about porn without pictures and everything. Maybe our porno preferences and the mention of double-penetration scored some negative points?

Always left out in the cold.

[BIL]

I think the shaved nutsack comment might've tripped the system11's laser crackdown grid, resulting in the topic nuke. A shave too far. ^_~

[BulletMagnet]

Nah, the thread's still there: the whole "deletion" thing was totally faked, the effect is just there to spice up the fantasy of Off-Topic to its intended audience; in this business you always have to do something to stand out. Seriously, you didn't know that?

[Skykid]

Nah, the thread's still there: the whole "deletion" thing was totally faked, the effect is just there to spice up the fantasy of Off-Topic to its intended audience; in this business you always have to do something to stand out. Seriously, you didn't know that?

Seriously, I wouldn't mind a serious answer.

It wasn't exactly boundary breaking, just silly idle chat. If there's a whole new Mary Whitehouse rationale been introduced on the fly, it's worth letting us know. Thread lock is one thing, but deletion is pretty heavy all things considered. Imo.

[Ed Oscuro]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famicom_Modem#cite_note-3

[trap15]

Can't back up something with a real citation? LINK IT TO SOME OTHER USER CONTRIBUTED THING THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE CITATIONS.

[Ed Oscuro]

The funny thing is that a few seconds of searching turned up this. Don't see any mention of an online SMB3 though...there is Super Mario Club but it appears to have been a kind of inventory / feedback application. So the one thing that TVT uniquely asserts is probably just bullshit.

[trap15]

Typical. I saw they basically shrugged off the FDS as a failure in the TVT thing, which is pretty much patently false as well.

[Edmond Dantes]

Wikipedia, using TV Tropes as a source.

It is to laugh, and pretty much means Wikipedia no longer has any credibility.

[Specineff]

Isn't there a way to challenge that kind of sources? I mean, after all the money they get every year, there has to be someone to take care of those entries, right?

[Ed Oscuro]

Don't you guys know how Wikipedia works? "The encyclopedia anybody can edit - yes, even you, Timmy!"

In other news, George Zimmerman found not guilty of murder because apparently somebody thought there was the possibility it was self-defense. Raises a question about how self-defense should be defined. Apparently, in Florida all you need to do is provoke somebody into punching you (okay, GZ suffered a broken schnoze) and you can burn a hole through them. Lots of talking heads on television yammering about justice, as if justice is process and not getting the right outcome.

[Edmond Dantes]

Related to what Oscuro just said, I hate anti-gun activists.

It would be like if Mario promised Bowser he would never use mushrooms or fire flowers, but there was nothing to prevent Bowser from using all the resources at his disposal. Mario would basically deserve to die for agreeing to that.

Also, that not enough people have read Romance of the Three Kingdoms and largely only know it via the video games (which greatly simplify everything).

[BareKnuckleRoo]

TASVideos. Apparently they used to keep a tight rein on what videos got approved for posting or denied based on whether or not it was entertaining enough, and not if it was simply good in terms of technical execution. You'd think they'd simply keep at least one TAS for every game out there, especially if the video hosting was offsite and somewhere like YouTube where having the page wouldn't eat up bandwidth. Instead, what you got was a popularity contest where people would complain about highly technically proficient TASes that utterly broke the game being too 'boring' and that was largely what determined if it was good enough to be approved.

The technical quality is of course very good with such a big part of the movie played with bots, but I really can't say that I think this game deserves to get published, no offense to the author. 2/9

I'm simply not a fan of dungeon crawlers and I don't believe they make good TASes. It makes me think of simply flipping through the pages of a book really really fast. I understand that this is likely very well done technically, but it suffers greatly in entertainment value. Basically what Cpadolf said. Rating it 1.5/9.5.

I don't browse the site much, but I hope their submission system is not this asinine nowadays. For reference, the TAS they're complaining about is of Wizardry I, a maddeningly frustrating RPG that normally can take weeks or months to beat because of how long characters take to level and can get permakilled so easily (edit: gah typos). The TAS run completely breaks it by beating it in 45 seconds with a pair of level 1 characters (without any bug abuse either, it's pure, ridiculously awesome luck manipulation).

Related to what Oscuro just said, I hate anti-gun activists.

It would be like if Mario promised Bowser he would never use mushrooms or fire flowers, but there was nothing to prevent Bowser from using all the resources at his disposal.

Not everyone who wants more responsible gun control laws or wants to see less guns in the hands of the extremely stupid members of the populace thinks the solution is to simply do away with all guns. But when a firearm is easily available without needing to go through a safety/training course to weed out some potentially irresponsible people, we have a much better chance of having with stuff like this occurring more frequently. Really, a good way of raising gun safety standards would be to ensure that there's a license you need to get by attending and passing a safety course, that needs to be renewed once ever couple of years.

If guns were more difficult to legally acquire, the people who'd go to the effort of sitting through a safety course to get one would be more likely to be responsible gun owners (instead of the kind of people that buy them on a whim to hand over to a batshit crazy neighbour or someone who leaves loaded rifles around young children). Simply requiring a background check isn't enough in the way of safety and due diligence when it comes to making sure someone who buys a gun is actually responsible with them, and even then people find ways around background checks apparently.

hopefully this doesn't derail into this kind of thread again

[Edmond Dantes]

I don't browse the site much, but I hope their submission system is not this asinine nowadays. For reference, the TAS they're complaining about is of Wizardry I, a maddeningly frustrating RPG that normally can take weeks or months to beat because of how easily characters take to level and can get permakilled. The TAS run completely breaks it by beating it in 45 seconds with a pair of level 1 characters (without any bug abuse either, it's pure, ridiculously awesome luck manipulation).

... Here I thought I was doing good by beating it in something like three days.

[BareKnuckleRoo]

... Here I thought I was doing good by beating it in something like three days.

That's still pretty darn good. The second time I beat it when I knew what I was doing it still took me a couple weeks (most of which was spent grinding on Murphy's Ghosts...).

[Edmond Dantes]

Well, to add a truly "little thing" to this topic.... it bothers me when people--Grown men, mind you--eagerly anticipate the premiere of a new cartoon based on a superhero comic.

For chrissakes, how many times can essentially the same story be told in animated form???

I sometimes feel like I'm the only guy on the interwebs who isn't a comic book geek.

[Ed Oscuro]

Related to what Oscuro just said, I hate anti-gun activists.

It would be like if Mario promised Bowser he would never use mushrooms or fire flowers, but there was nothing to prevent Bowser from using all the resources at his disposal. Mario would basically deserve to die for agreeing to that.

Also, that not enough people have read Romance of the Three Kingdoms and largely only know it via the video games (which greatly simplify everything).

I just posted a few things over at the blog The Truth About Guns if you wanted to have a look (look for Edwin's posts).

I agree that you cannot know what somebody is thinking. If somebody is beating the hell out of you, I am not going to complain if you zap them. However, I think that's not accurate to what happened here - and more importantly, what can and does happen. (See this article for a well-publicized Texas case.)

What I wanted to focus on at TTAG was the lunacy of saying that gun owners - keeping in mind that TTAG is all about self-responsibility and safety - are not at fault when they get into a situation they know will likely turn out badly, and having their only safeguard be their pistol. Zimmerman is not a guy out in the middle of nowhere or in a dark alley being followed. He was on the phone with police, who had his back; he could have stayed in his SUV; and very likely he could have approached the confrontation on foot successfully, if he had approached it differently.

Trayvon was just trying to get home. He was shot 70 yards from the home he was staying in.

[JAPJAC]

L'usage du conducteur d'une voiture feux de détresse au Japon. Ils ne comprennent pas quand est le bon moment pour les utiliser. Ils les utilisent pour arrêter n'importe où et à n'importe quel moment, en inversant les allées, avant de faire demi-tour, etc Putain, c'est dangereux et ils obtiennent un abus mal embouché de moi comme un résultat à chaque fois. Cunts.

[trap15]

Englishmen who decide to post in all French for absolutely no reason.

[Aliquantic]

And who use Google Translate to do so.

[JAPJAC]

Je ne parle pas anglais plonker. C'est un monde qui n'est pas pour les anglophones que vous savez Rodney.

[trap15]

I see words, but all I'm hearing when I'm trying to read it is the sound of shit hitting the floor.

[jonny5]

Française est trop reem, innit

[emphatic]

Française est trop reem, innit

[BulletMagnet]

Ordering a package from a few states away. Getting tracking on package. Watching tracking as item arrives in my state. Becoming incredibly confused when item then leaves my state and winds up on the opposite coast before coming back to my state a week after it was supposed to arrive. Fortunately it still seems to be in one piece, but I can only wonder what the heck is happening at the ol' post office these days, heh.

[BareKnuckleRoo]

People who say things like "everyone's entitled to their own opinions/beliefs" as if it's a valid response to an argument. It's such a wishy-washy, noncommital response that's especially irritating to hear when dealing with someone who can't or won't even try to rationally explain/justify their opinions. Having an opinion on something without being able to validate why you hold that opinion just makes that opinion unfounded at best, stupid at worst.

I don't mean this in reference to an opinion on individual taste preference, like what ice cream flavour you like or dislike, but things that you ought to be able to back up (or at least attempt to do so) why you feel a certain way about something important. This bitching is in reference to noticing a family member wearing one of those idiotic 'magic' bracelets with a little hologram in it that claims to be healing/energetic because 'ions are vitamins for the air' or some bullshit nonsense that reads like someone who flunked out of ninth grade chemistry wrote it. Any attempts to point out it was a scam designed to prey on the gullible and that its claims aren't remotely supported by any science and an explanation of what ions actually were was met with a "well I think it works and everyone's entitled to their beliefs". When they're being sold by the thousands touting ludicrous health claims, for fuck's sake, that's just not right, and if your opinion is that it's okay for gullible people to be preyed on with bullshit products promising magical healing energies, then I'm sorry, but your opinion is stupid and you're a fuckwad.

Getting rich must really be easy when your primary market is people who don't know any better... :/

[Ed Oscuro]

The simple way to deal with that is pointing out that those beliefs are now infringing upon your beliefs - and your well-being. It doesn't matter if somebody else believes the magic bracelet does wonders for you, but you believe it won't, their persistence in trying to force you to say those beliefs are OK is actually an affront to your own beliefs. Of course, at this point, your interlocutor might start to wonder "but then doesn't that there's something, like, WRONG about opinions?" and you say "RIGHT!"

[BulletMagnet]

...if your opinion is that it's okay for gullible people to be preyed on with bullshit products promising magical healing energies, then I'm sorry, but your opinion is stupid and you're a fuckwad.

A fair amount of what passes for our political discourse is based on this "opinion" (often under the guise of "market freedom" or, even more cynically, "personal responsibility"), and as you note many people have gotten quite rich as a result (though my personal "favorites" are the "if you just think positively, you can alter your surroundings by sheer force of will (and if you fail, well, you're just not being positive enough, try again, and don't ask my social class for any favors)" motivational speakers and whatnot, which I'd venture explains a lot more about our current state than most would care to acknowledge.

[Skykid]

Getting rich must really be easy when your primary market is people who don't know any better... :/

Welcome to the world.

There's currently a discussion regarding the positive aspects of the live action Transformers movies happening in the other thread.

Such is life.

[Edmond Dantes]

How Americans stay stupid:

One, invent a standard of "Objective" and "Subjective."

Two, claim that damn near everything is "Subjective." Keep doing so until there's very few things that can popularly be considered "Objective" (and, conveniently, all happen to be things you agree with).

Three, claim that anyone who tries to claim a subjective thing is actually objective is being arrogant and forcing his opinions on people. Act like this immediately invalidates anything he or she says.

Four, remember to never argue fairly. You don't want the guy who knows what he's talking about to win... unless he's on your side.

That, and a decent helping of feel-good nonsense you stole from a Sailor Says segment, will keep most people ignorant and stupid for life.