: What did Bill Nye say to the inkling?
http://i.imgur.com/AFkJezp.jpg
: > [{quoted}](name=NaCl Shaker,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=sePxa754,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-06-19T20:20:51.708+0000) > > She was using some kind of cheat, 100%. > > That or she's some kind of up-and-coming pro gr1ll g4m3r that Riot is conspiring against and doesn't want to ever get to a professional level, so they banned her as soon as they got wind of her rising skill level. > > Also if you actually think it's settled you wouldn't make an attention-grab thread! > > Grats OP you're officially a contradictory scumbag This thread is from yesterday. As of today, it seems to be settled. She's never cheated in any way. And she's like Gold 4. She was only even playing a couple times a week as of late. You went full retard, son. Never go full retard.
> [{quoted}](name=The Lazengann,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=sePxa754,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2015-06-20T00:50:18.574+0000) > > This thread is from yesterday. As of today, it seems to be settled. > > She's never cheated in any way. And she's like Gold 4. She was only even playing a couple times a week as of late. > > You went full retard, son. Never go full retard. You think I went full retard, but at least I didn't go full cheating scriptkiddie like your friend.
: An Account Question; The Ban-ening
She was using some kind of cheat, 100%. That or she's some kind of up-and-coming pro gr1ll g4m3r that Riot is conspiring against and doesn't want to ever get to a professional level, so they banned her as soon as they got wind of her rising skill level. > \>Thats kind of you, but the matter seems settled. Also if you actually think it's settled you wouldn't make an attention-grab thread! Grats OP you're officially a contradictory scumbag
: Clearly toxic players have mental problems, so yeah lets ban them , make fund of them
Riot doesn't even TALK about posting logs anywhere unless you publicly challenge them and their ability to detect toxic players. And even then you have to give permission for them to post the logs.. In terms of real-world stuff like the picture in the OP: you can 100% blame a mentally ill person for what they do. It's their body, doesn't matter if they have something like schizophrenia that messes with their perception of reality. They are that dysfunctional person. There's no argument about whether or not they -are- the person in every legal sense. And since they are legally that person, they deserve all of the repercussions of their actions. If you're going to excuse mentally ill for their actions, then we should start looking into murderers' brains (murderers that aren't already classically diagnosed as schizophrenic, at least). We should evaluate their brains for chemical imbalances and deformities, and if anything is less-than-normal we pardon them of all guilt. We can let the murderers walk free because they're just poor, mentally ill people, right?
Cspence (NA)
: I can't wait for GD to die, this is going to be the best day of my life.
+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 +1 We need more threads like this so Riot can see that GD doesn't deserve to live
Dragfin (NA)
: What Riot should do is let us police ourselves in an individual way. Lets say you have 1000 players in your ELO pool that you get matched with for games. "YOU" get to judge if the 9 players that "YOU" are matched with are worthy enough. What I mean by worthy enough, I mean during "YOUR" game were they toxic? Did they understand the basics of the game? How was their overall play in "YOUR" opinion? Basically were they a good player. If they do not fit "YOUR" criteria of a good player, taking into account everything "YOU" think "YOU" know about the game then "YOU" get the option to report them. This will in turn ban them from "YOUR" ELO matchmaking que for a pre-determined amount of days like 30. "YOU" will not be matched with this player again for that time period. In time what I think this process will do is weed out the assholes or those who are too lazy to make an effort to play the game the way it is supposed to be played. If these players continue to be toxic or play the way they play that gets them reported and banned from ELO ques, then eventually this player will have to quit League, play solo bots or what we all want, stop being lazy and learn to play the game how it's meant to be played because eventually they won't have anyone to play with. By giving them a 30 day ban from an individual que it gives them plenty of chances to fix their behavior or it will result in what I just said. Now for those of you who think this system could be abused. Well if "YOU" want to report just to report then eventually "YOU" won't have anyone to play with because "YOU" will have banned everyone "YOU" could be playing with. In other words, stupid reports will hurt the person doing the reporting. This would work both ways in fixing the cancer players and fixing the stupid reports. This is just an idea that came to mind. This or a variation of this could work to fix this awful community and make League a fun place to be again.
> [{quoted}](name=Dragfin,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=AMipiZh3,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-06-10T20:23:51.410+0000) > > What Riot should do is let us police ourselves in an individual way. > > Lets say you have 1000 players in your ELO pool that you get matched with for games. > > "YOU" get to judge if the 9 players that "YOU" are matched with are worthy enough. What I mean by worthy enough, I mean during "YOUR" game were they toxic? Did they understand the basics of the game? How was their overall play in "YOUR" opinion? Basically were they a good player. If they do not fit "YOUR" criteria of a good player, taking into account everything "YOU" think "YOU" know about the game then "YOU" get the option to report them. This will in turn ban them from "YOUR" ELO matchmaking que for a pre-determined amount of days like 30. "YOU" will not be matched with this player again for that time period. > > In time what I think this process will do is weed out the assholes or those who are too lazy to make an effort to play the game the way it is supposed to be played. If these players continue to be toxic or play the way they play that gets them reported and banned from ELO ques, then eventually this player will have to quit League, play solo bots or what we all want, stop being lazy and learn to play the game how it's meant to be played because eventually they won't have anyone to play with. By giving them a 30 day ban from an individual que it gives them plenty of chances to fix their behavior or it will result in what I just said. > > Now for those of you who think this system could be abused. Well if "YOU" want to report just to report then eventually "YOU" won't have anyone to play with because "YOU" will have banned everyone "YOU" could be playing with. In other words, stupid reports will hurt the person doing the reporting. This would work both ways in fixing the cancer players and fixing the stupid reports. > > This is just an idea that came to mind. This or a variation of this could work to fix this awful community and make League a fun place to be again. The report system IS the policing in an individual way you fucking tard (minus the fucking retarded blacklisting) What you described is LITERALLY the report system atm
Jamaree (NA)
: It just dawned on me I can make a Raccoon looking Popuri Gunner in TERA.
\>make thread before fact checking OP you're a really special person And by special I mean braindead
: Splatoon community...
I don't even play this or own a Wii U but I fucking saved 90% of these. This is fucking gold. Also, clearly the way to escape 7 year olds online is to play the games made for them cus they're "too cool" to play the kiddy games.
lonian (NA)
: How exactly can ELO be represented in numeric form?
Does it really matter about what Elo someone is? Elo is the most garbage indicator of skill, right up there with the Mastery system; they're both grind-based systems that just show you played a lot. For the average player it means absolutely nothing. ESPECIALLY for gold through diamond 3. Just about anybody can get there with enough games played. Fuck, if I had $1 for every gold+ player that I've played with who doesn't use their ultimates properly (if at all) when they're on their MAIN, then I'd be earning at least 3 dollars per game.
: I asked people to report me the past few days and finally got a 27 game chat restriction
Here's the problem with your post: you're omitting any evidence that all you said was "team please report me" and that's it. There's literally 0 reason to believe anyone on GD who has no evidence because they're all shitposters.
: > [{quoted}](name=biggad2001,realm=EUNE,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=RiGF5ElH,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-05-26T01:47:38.952+0000) > > But ya cant go lower than gold 5 Oh, _hell _ no. If you do that you're definitely not worthy of Gold, and it'd be a rough argument to convince anyone you even belong in Silver.
> [{quoted}](name=Vicvictorw,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=RiGF5ElH,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2015-05-26T01:51:20.143+0000) > > Oh, _hell _ no. If you do that you're definitely not worthy of Gold, and it'd be a rough argument to convince anyone you even belong in Silver. +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1
: You've aced the enemy team, taken Baron, and you've got a juicy minion wave pushing in.
You should just be instantly banned for a week if enemy team has 25+ seconds left on death timers and you don't push after taking Baron
RexSaur (NA)
: I like on how we cant even buy icons with IP anymore...
Just don't buy them, maybe Riot will stop making them 250 Rp... oh wait, if so much as 10 people buy it then it's instantly worth making the community hate them for it since nobody will stop playing the game
Snolen (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=00010000000000010000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:33:52.757+0000) > > He only won 3 of the matches in that entire video (and he's playing hunter) > > Not sure if less than 50% winrate counts as "just fine" Wrong, the deck has a 50% winrate, and he does in fact reach legend with it.
> [{quoted}](name=SnowLynx,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=000100000000000100000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T22:27:08.768+0000) > > Wrong, the deck has a 55% winrate, and he does in fact reach legend with it. Citation needed on overall winrate Also, since I'm familiar with streamers and their use of random decks in the ranked ladders you need to prove to me he climbed all the way to legend from chicken rank with this deck only. I'm pretty sure he made it while at rank 1 and then got into legend with it. That is not the same as climbing from rank 25 to legend. That's RNG falling into his favor and allowing his shitty deck to get the right draws to beat some people and get into legend from rank 1.
La Spork (NA)
: LF 1 Man for Premade Tournament @ 7:00 EST (1 Hour)
1) What are the rewards 2) Is VOIP being used and what VOIP service is it 3) Odds of your teammates disconnecting mid-match
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:25:18.293+0000) > > [Citation needed] Why? So you'd just say "You got lucky" or "those r fake" or "you spent money"?
> [{quoted}](name=IllusoryLumines,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:31:26.246+0000) > > Why? So you'd just say "You got lucky" or "those r fake" or "you spent money"? No because I want to see proof you actually got legend and never spent money. If you can provide proof of those 2 things then how am I supposed to claim the contrary?
Snolen (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:23:11.981+0000) > > You aren't going to reach legend with F2P decks or decks that don't contain cards that you could describe as "meta." > > Rank 10 with a less than ideal deck isn't hard. It's actually hardly an accomplishment. Getting to legend and staying in legend is another story. Both decks actually came from people who played it in legend rank just fine. Face Scumtard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP9e1tSQXRA
> [{quoted}](name=SnowLynx,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=0001000000000001,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:27:54.799+0000) > > Both decks actually came from people who played it in legend rank just fine. > > Face Scumtard > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP9e1tSQXRA He only won 3 of the matches in that entire video (and he's playing hunter) Not sure if less than 50% winrate counts as "just fine" Also he's not playing against top of legend. He's playing against people closer to innkeeper rank. There were 3 legend ranks. One in the 100's, one at 38, one at 700's. The only one he beat was Whelp, at rank 38, and he just barely won. He played 7 games. He won 3. One of 3 wins were against a legend. He lost 2/3 games against legend. He lost 2 more games to people within rank 1 to 3. He won one game in rank 1 to 3. Also, he did not climb to R1 with that deck, he made it up and played with it.
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:23:11.981+0000) > > You aren't going to reach legend with F2P decks or decks that don't contain cards that you could describe as "meta." > > Rank 10 with a less than ideal deck isn't hard. It's actually hardly an accomplishment. Getting to legend and staying in legend is another story. I hit legend with mechmage, havent spent a penny. Also I have ~7 legendaries. Your move.
> [{quoted}](name=IllusoryLumines,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:24:06.073+0000) > > I hit legend with mechmage, havent spent a penny. [Citation needed]
: > [{quoted}](name=SnowLynx,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:16:23.933+0000) > > TBH most people who argue this leave the impression of some salty newbie who never found out how to make their decks in a reasonable fashion. > > Currently rank 10, both of the decks that got me there didn't require any payments and both are cheap in cost. I'm hoping for legend next season. Exactly. The majority of people who complain about "P2W! RNG!" play and craft like shit or have no idea of tempo or anything. Like seriously, ive been playing since january and already have tirion, boom, sylvanas, antonidas, malganis, 4 wings of naxx, all of oil rogue, 2 FoNs, sky golem and legend cardback.
> [{quoted}](name=IllusoryLumines,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:21:30.495+0000) > > Exactly. The majority of people who complain about "P2W! RNG!" play and craft like shit. You aren't going to reach legend with F2P decks or decks that don't contain cards that you could describe as "meta." Rank 10 with a less than ideal deck isn't hard. It's actually hardly an accomplishment. Getting to legend and staying in legend is another story.
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:17:18.657+0000) > > Wait...a TCG/CCG is P2W? > > Wow who the fuck would've guessed that you need the best cards to win. Idk, all of GD thinks that buying 100 packs to get one legendary, and then drawing it out of a deck of 30 cards is a display of skill. Like the guy above you, for example.
> [{quoted}](name=Darkvolcan,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=MYY2xilr,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:18:07.251+0000) > > Idk, all of GD thinks that buying 100 packs to get one legendary, and then drawing it out of a deck of 30 cards is a display of skill. Like the guy above you, for example. Actually I think most of GD is in agreement that CreditCardStone has very little skill involved. And the guy above me seems to be delusional about his chances of ranking up with an allegedly F2P deck that seems to have suboptimal cards.
: Why do kids think KidneyStone is skill based and not RNG+P2W?
Wait...a TCG/CCG is P2W? Wow who the fuck would've guessed that you need the best cards to win.
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=HeraldOne,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2015-05-25T21:09:34.602+0000) > > Well, the fact there's still ongoing legislation in Sweden and the rest of Europe to make urinating while standing up illegal, up to installing monitoring devices on toilets to enforce the law, is a clear indication that given enough time and propaganda people can be made to do absolutely anything. IMO there's not much difference between Feminism and say, Scientology. They're both radical ideological systems that methodically encase people into thinking in certain ways and discourage any questioning or scrutiny... as with any other cult. > > Anyhow, there's already a figure been thrown around that 70% of men between ages 20-34 in the US are unmarried, a percentage I think will only keep getting higher as more men decide to entirely avoid courts and laws that are heavily skewed in favor of one gender. Exactly. The way society is going right now fits into most theories and experiments for the last several decades. Check out Calhoun's studies if you have the time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun
: I think I found out how match making works.
That looks a little too straightforward to be true in the slightest. Have you actually experimented on this yourself and have results you can show that aren't purely anecdotal? If anything, the team you're assigned to is decided well before you click accept. Imagine the system before the "wait for all 10 to accept" method: you get a game, and can wait to join or enter the lobby now. The teams were already decided by the time the match is found. The system right now probably works exactly the same way, but it now makes sure that **all** players accepted the match before continuing.
pleep (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Darkvolcan,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:43:05.188+0000) > > It's not that there's "powerful" white knights; there's just too many of them. > Men as a whole have become massively pussified. We're following in the footsteps of Japan and Korea right now. Which is fucking stupid. Rolf there are no powerfull white knights? have u seen obama?
> [{quoted}](name=pleep,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=00040001,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:53:31.201+0000) > > Rolf there are no powerfull white knights? have u seen obama? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLdElcv5qqc Mr. Obama and friends want to discourage sexual violence....against women. Yes, that's right. The focus is only on women. Let's ignore the men that get assaulted. Meanwhile: http://endsexualviolence.org/where-we-stand/male-victims https://www.rainn.org/get-information/types-of-sexual-assault/male-sexual-assault http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/27/male-victims-sexual-assault_n_6535730.html > [{quoted}](name=Darkvolcan,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=000400010000,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:55:40.961+0000) > > The government only cares about controlling the population. > A bunch of beta cuckholds, and fat feminazis joined the same team and became the majority. They don't even need to try in order to impose bullshit laws at this point. > It's not that they're white knights, they just want to turn this country into a dictatorship, and they found a majority willing to vote for it. So they'll seize the chance. The government's running on a different agenda than the whale and cucks are. I can get what you're saying about just taking advantage of people who are going to vote for them, but I'm not sure about the dictatorship part. Not yet, at least. Yes - American politics is ran by businesses (because of $$$) but I can't say I agree about the end-goal being dictatorship.
: It's not that there's "powerful" white knights; there's just too many of them. Men as a whole have become massively pussified. We're following in the footsteps of Japan and Korea right now. Which is fucking stupid.
> [{quoted}](name=Darkvolcan,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:43:05.188+0000) > > It's not that there's "powerful" white knights; there's just too many of them. > Men as a whole have become massively pussified. We're following in the footsteps of Japan and Korea right now. Which is fucking stupid. Well, yes, there are many white knights, but the policy makers agreeing with feminists has a very immediate impact.
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:34:03.734+0000) > > Extreme feminism pushing nonsensical laws into action is actually pretty new. Feminism right now is no longer a small-ish group of women writing books about how they hate men. It's no longer the women who were simply looking for actual equality (voting rights, equal pay). Now it's a very, very large group of man-hating women actually gaining large-scale media attention and has the power to persuade law-makers into writing their bullshit into law. Burn straw men burn! Disco inferno! But then again, I guess you can't help it. Accurate representations of the arguments of the people you disagree with would make it so that you can't argue against them.
> [{quoted}](name=Holy Malevolence,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:38:41.604+0000) > > Burn straw men burn! > Disco inferno! > > But then again, I guess you can't help it. Accurate representations of the arguments of the people you disagree with would make it so that you can't argue against them. My representations of feminist arguments, and the position of women in society today, are actually pretty accurate. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2555513 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/10015766/Isnt-it-time-to-abolish-most-womens-prisons.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Miller_Gearhart http://www.nber.org/digest/jan07/w12139.html http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/02/24/childless-women-in-their-twenties-out-earn-men-so/ Do you care to present any arguments that I can debunk for you? Or are you going to continue not explaining your positions ("you have no reading comprehension") without backing them up?
: "Rapidly and successfully". Did I stumble into a time machine and fall back forty years or some shit? You seem to be implying feminism is something new.
> [{quoted}](name=Holy Malevolence,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=ki8WhgwA,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:27:58.684+0000) > > "Rapidly and successfully". > > Did I stumble into a time machine and fall back forty years or some shit? > You seem to be implying feminism is something new. Extreme feminism pushing nonsensical laws into action is actually pretty new. Feminism right now is no longer a small-ish group of women writing books about how they hate men. It's no longer the women who were simply looking for actual equality (voting rights, equal pay). Now it's a very, very large group of man-hating women actually gaining large-scale media attention and has the power to persuade law-makers into writing their bullshit into law.
Rioter Comments
Jikker (NA)
: I actually made $1 an hour less than my male co-workers at the park last year, but that was probably because they had past experience and I didn't. I'm not actually sure where the whole "women make less" argument comes from because all jobs I look at/have had are based on education and experience for pay, not gender.
> [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=R1EONw3l,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:12:33.664+0000) > > I actually made $1 an hour less than my male co-workers at the park last year, but that was probably because they had past experience and I didn't. I'm not actually sure where the whole "women make less" argument comes from because all jobs I look at/have had are based on education and experience for pay, not gender. It's because people like playing statistics to their own needs. Women earn less when you look at -every single fucking job on the planet-, but when you look at the same jobs within an industry you'll see that there's almost no gap at all. If anything, women earn MORE now (compared to men with the -same job- ofc)
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=Jg0AWVYk,comment-id=000200000000000200000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T19:49:12.753+0000) > > There is no such thing as pay gap. If you work for an employer and have the same job position as some other person, and with the same experience, you are entitled to equal pay under the law. That is how it works. IF you do not receive equal pay in that scenario, which is probably NOT the case, then you should speak with your employer about that and use the court system if he doesn't comply. Sounds like you have no reading comprehension. > > People earn less because they have shittier jobs than their wealthier counterparts. Of course a McDonalds employee working in a poor ghetto is going to earn less than the CEO of Microsoft. Does the McDonalds employee deserve more pay because there's a wealthy CEO out there? Fuck no. Does he deserve more pay if there's another McDonalds employee earning more than him? If it's for the same job, then he deserves equal pay. But NOBODY deserves more pay just because someone who has a more important job makes more money. Spoken like someone who has no idea what the fuck the problem is. Good job, moron. > > [Some of] The richest people being white is coincidence - anyone who strikes a gold mine will be rich. The thing is, most people don't have the resources, time, dedication, etc. to find the gold mine and take from it. First, it's most of. Second, it's not coincidence, it's mostly inheritance from before the time minorities had rights. > > Also, you're definitely a feminist. That, or you're as blindly ignorant as one. You're spouting claims that relate to race and gender and claiming that you're working for equality while, at the same time, making statements that try to discredit white men ("The problem with earnings is, in fact, income inequality. IMO. And the fact that the top 10%/1% are mostly white dudes."). If a feminist makes an accurate claim, I'd agree with 'em, sure. And I must note how you're not saying I'm wrong on that point. Thus the "Blindly ignorant" part seems like it'd be more at home within your own introspection. Not that you seem to be the introspective type. > > Why does it matter if the top earners are white men, anyway? Oh yeah, there isn't one unless you're a racist. INB4 "You can't be racist against whites" The fact that it mostly comes from advantages amassed in pre-civil rights America which gave them an outright massive edge, whereafter there has been a concerted effort to maintain the status quo and keep the poor poor. And I wouldn't even call it racist since I kind of inherently benefit from the bullshit. Y'know, being an affluent white dude whose parents were well off. > > Also, why are you trying to censor speech? I'm..... Not? > You're implying that some peoples' opinions are worth less than others...because they're assholes and greedy? More stating. The opinions of people whose motive is senseless greed isn't worth shit to me. > > You're a nutjob feminazi through and through. Words from dumbasses fail to faze.
> [{quoted}](name=Holy Malevolence,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=Jg0AWVYk,comment-id=0002000000000002000000000000,timestamp=2015-05-25T20:02:15.085+0000) > > Sounds like you have no reading comprehension. So apparently I just have no reading comprehension, care to back that up? Oh wait, of course you won't back it up with reasoning. You're a feminist, after all. > > Spoken like someone who has no idea what the fuck the problem is. Again, care to explain? I laid out my argument clearly. > Good job, moron. > > First, it's most of. > Second, it's not coincidence, it's mostly inheritance from before the time minorities had rights. Citation needed. Also, explain how the number of rich blacks/Hispanics/etc has been growing. Must be a lot of discrimination preventing them from making money...wait... > > If a feminist makes an accurate claim, I'd agree with 'em, sure. > And I must note how you're not saying I'm wrong on that point. Thus the "Blindly ignorant" part seems like it'd be more at home within your own introspection. Again, please do explain how I'm wrong. You seem to be reading bits and pieces of my post and not actually responding to anything properly > Not that you seem to be the introspective type. > > The fact that it mostly comes from advantages amassed in pre-civil rights America which gave them an outright massive edge, whereafter there has been a concerted effort to maintain the status quo and keep the poor poor. Citation needed, now you're just throwing conspiracy theories out there like a tin-foil hat wearing lunatic > And I wouldn't even call it racist since I kind of inherently benefit from the bullshit. Y'know, being an affluent white dude whose parents were well off. Did you not stop to think for a second that maybe your parents actually have no family heritage of wealth and that their own wealth is because they actually took their education seriously and worked for a living? Oh, no you probably didn't because you're a psychopath that thinks money is handed to people for being white > > I'm..... Not? Clearly you are trying to censor speech, as seen below by article [A] > > More stating. > The opinions of people whose motive is senseless greed isn't worth shit to me. [A] You're outright admitting you'd ignore what people have to say because you don't agree with them. > > Words from dumbasses fail to matter. ~~I marked my replies within your quote with bold text.~~
: "women are scumbag" saying this is passible of losing your job/getting arrested/going to prison etc
>because they make 20 cents less an hour than a man Citation needed Same job = same pay If a woman works at WalMart because she has no value in the job market, ofc she's making less than a surgeon.
: GD, if I made a "pokemon like" game in C# would anyone play it?
What happened to making a MOBA in UE4? Do you just make these threads every week or some shit Clearly you're still a liar
: > [{quoted}](name=pleep,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=Jg0AWVYk,comment-id=0002000000000002,timestamp=2015-05-25T17:45:33.129+0000) > > too long didnt read. > > You are 1000000000% a feminist. It hilarious how you people deny being feminists when you agree with 99.9% of their shit. You are a feminist buddy, deal with it. There's a difference between agreement and lack of disagreement. In most things I don't even have the slightest fucking idea what feminists are talking about, and in areas where I'd seek to usher in improvements I'd do essentially nothing the same way a feminist would. That I know of, at least. Like, for instance, the gender pay gap. I'm sure you've heard of it. I'm sure you know how it's not simply a gender thing. It is, in fact, a complicated issue. I think feminists are coming at it from the wrong angle, 'cause there's also a pay gap between black/hispanic pay and white pay. The problem with earnings is, in fact, income inequality. IMO. And the fact that the top 10%/1% are mostly white dudes. Thus the proper way to fix it would be to just be a liberal. Advocate for tax reform. Get rid of loopholes. Increase the minimum wage. Shit that lowers income inequality will, likewise, most likely get rid of both sex based and race based wage gaps. Which will leave everyone in a better position except for the assholes whose opinions are worthless 'cause they're greedy fucks.
> [{quoted}](name=Holy Malevolence,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=Jg0AWVYk,comment-id=00020000000000020000,timestamp=2015-05-25T18:28:33.273+0000) > > There's a difference between agreement and lack of disagreement. > In most things I don't even have the slightest fucking idea what feminists are talking about, and in areas where I'd seek to usher in improvements I'd do essentially nothing the same way a feminist would. > That I know of, at least. > > Like, for instance, the gender pay gap. > I'm sure you've heard of it. > I'm sure you know how it's not simply a gender thing. > It is, in fact, a complicated issue. > > I think feminists are coming at it from the wrong angle, 'cause there's also a pay gap between black/hispanic pay and white pay. > The problem with earnings is, in fact, income inequality. IMO. And the fact that the top 10%/1% are mostly white dudes. > Thus the proper way to fix it would be to just be a liberal. > Advocate for tax reform. Get rid of loopholes. Increase the minimum wage. > Shit that lowers income inequality will, likewise, most likely get rid of both sex based and race based wage gaps. > Which will leave everyone in a better position except for the assholes whose opinions are worthless 'cause they're greedy fucks. There is no such thing as pay gap. If you work for an employer and have the same job position as some other person, and with the same experience, you are entitled to equal pay under the law. That is how it works. IF you do not receive equal pay in that scenario, which is probably NOT the case, then you should speak with your employer about that and use the court system if he doesn't comply. People earn less because they have shittier jobs than their wealthier counterparts. Of course a McDonalds employee working in a poor ghetto is going to earn less than the CEO of Microsoft. Does the McDonalds employee deserve more pay because there's a wealthy CEO out there? Fuck no. Does he deserve more pay if there's another McDonalds employee earning more than him? If it's for the same job, then he deserves equal pay. But NOBODY deserves more pay just because someone who has a more important job makes more money. [Some of] The richest people being white (because it's not exclusively "white men") is coincidence - anyone who strikes a gold mine will be rich. The thing is, most people don't have the resources, time, dedication, etc. to find the gold mine and take from it. Also, you're definitely a feminist. That, or you're as blindly ignorant as one. You're spouting claims that relate to race and gender and claiming that you're working for equality while, at the same time, making statements that try to discredit white men ("The problem with earnings is, in fact, income inequality. IMO. And the fact that the top 10%/1% are mostly white dudes."). Why does it matter if the top earners are white men, anyway? Oh yeah, there isn't one unless you're a racist. INB4 "You can't be racist against whites" Also, why are you trying to censor speech? >Which will leave everyone in a better position except for the assholes whose opinions are worthless 'cause they're greedy fucks. You're implying that some peoples' opinions are worth less than others...because they're assholes and greedy? You're a nutjob feminazi through and through.
: Using the #KillAllMen hashtag is fine snd you won't get punished for it, because it's a "joke"
It's a world controlled by women who have supreme legal power and giant victim complexes. Also it's controlled by the cucks who support women in their destructive behaviors
: I guess programming is hard for Rito.
xD i know the languages of at least 10 different codes now i can criticize riot too!
: You're trying so hard; it's kind of cute. Only bit I'm going to throw out there, due to having prior engagements: putting quotation marks around words or groups of words gives that group of words the enhancement of becoming one singular object. It was never used to add emphasis, and in fact should not be used for that reason under any levels of formality. Italics and underlines are used for emphasis, among other things. Example! There is is incorrect. - Incorrect "There is" is correct. - Correct Next class in English 101, we will teach you the difference between formal and casual grammar, and when to use either.
> [{quoted}](name=Sewer Rat,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=L6q06Y88,comment-id=000b0000000000000000,timestamp=2015-05-14T20:35:21.892+0000) > > You're trying so hard; it's kind of cute. > > Only bit I'm going to throw out there, due to having prior engagements: putting quotation marks around words or groups of words gives that group of words the enhancement of becoming one singular object. It was never used to add emphasis, and in fact should not be used for that reason under any levels of formality. Italics and underlines are used for emphasis, among other things. > > Example! > > There is is incorrect. - Incorrect > > "There is" is correct. - Correct > > Next class in English 101, we will teach you the difference between formal and casual grammar, and when to use either. You start off a sentence with "Only bit" instead of "The only bit" and then you expect me to believe you know how to write? LOL KID Please >gives that group of words the enhancement of becoming one singular object No, there's 2 uses to putting quotes around words or phrases: a) as scare quotes used for emphasis or otherwise intentionally added tone. It's usually not advised to use them in most situations. You never underline or use italics instead of scare quotes if your intent is to do the same thing as a scare quote. When I'm talking about your usage of quotations, I'm referring to you putting quotes around words like "fix" as a way to use them sarcastically. Those are scare quotes and are a stylistic choice but is often not preferred. b) to mark them as a special phrase, like in your example. That is a mandatory usage of quotations around a word or phrase. Again, obviously you do not italicize or underline. Please stop trying to sound smart. You aren't a good writer. I'm sure most of your teachers are fine, but you're a moron that doesn't understand how to write. > Next class in English 101, we will teach you the difference between formal and casual grammar, and when to use either. Next class, we're going to teach you when to use a comma to set off an independent clause and when to not use one for a dependent clause. (Oh, in case you're thinking it's a list: it's not a formal list.) You're a fucking tool.
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=L6q06Y88,comment-id=000b0000,timestamp=2015-05-14T19:20:00.106+0000) > > It's ironic that people try to talk about anyone's education when I'm clearly able to use proper grammar in an appropriate setting. Also, since we're on that note, I fixed your poorly written post. 1: Technically speaking, the first two words are grammatically correct, since they are being used as expletives. Expletives ignore a surprising amount of textual rules. By adding a comma, you're implying that there is a pause between the two. Seeing as there was no such comma in my post, there is no pause implied. Expletives can also be capitalized whenever the writer pleases, to add proper emphasis. 2: Second fix is also unneeded, since "in order to" is the formal usage. In a casual situation, such as the Boards, "to accommodate" is perfectly correct. In fact, to use the formalized text would be incorrect, since this is a casual setting. 3: Funny, the sentence no longer makes sense after your "fix." If you meant "would be best," that is also unneeded, since as stated above, this is a casual environment. "I think it best" is just as correct as "I think it would be best." However, using the text after the phrase, "that we get rid of," the phrase "I think it best" is more phonetically appealing. 4: If you honestly think you can "school" me in a test of grammar, you're sorely mistaken. You see, I AM that pretentious prick that makes every attempt to show people just how uneducated they really are. Not only are you providing false information, you're being just as pretentious. Nobody needs to stoop to your level of grammar while playing a video game.
> [{quoted}](name=Sewer Rat,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=L6q06Y88,comment-id=000b00000000,timestamp=2015-05-14T19:50:53.323+0000) > ~~ 1: They're not correct and I'm not sure where you're getting your grammar lessons from. You don't capitalize expletives mid-sentence just because they're expletives (unless you're a proper noun). You also would definitely put a comma between them because the first is treated as an interjection. Also, "No No!" isn't an expletive. "There is" is an expletive. 2: I changed it for clarity because I can. I also changed it because the tone of **your post** was formal, so I made the formal change. 3: I left out the word "be" by mistake, but "I think it best" isn't commonly used and is awkward. You would most likely be marked for using it in any formal writing assignment. "I think it is" or "I think it would be" would be the expected phrases. Even if you're going to consider the usage for its diction, then "I think it best" is still incorrect. It's more formal than colloquial or informal. 4: And, again, you're not good at writing. I'm sorry, but you aren't. You put quotes around words for no reason other than to use them as if they were air quotes or some stupid shit. Nobody, except for retarded middle-school kids, tries to put quotes around words to imply sarcasm because it's entirely incorrect to do so. At the end of the day, I really hardly care what you have to say simply because of #4. Good luck when you get out of high school. ~~ Random fixes to your garbage sentences: If you meant "would be best," that is also unneeded, **because** *, as stated above, this is a casual environment The second fix is also unneeded, **because ** "in order to" is the formal usage. In a casual situation, such as the Boards, "to accommodate" is perfectly correct. In fact, **using** the formalized text would be incorrect, because* this is a casual setting However, **considering **the text **used **after the phrase "that we get rid of," the phrase "I think it best" is more phonetically appealing. [fixes to wordiness] Technically speaking, the first two words are grammatically correct, **because** *they are being used as expletives (*"since" should be reserved for passages of time)
: Which chromas do you think would be nice?
No chroma in League can ever be cool, because they all cost money. I already spent 975 RP on a skin, why do I have to spend another $5 for a recolor?
: It's not that hard to write fast and use correct punctuation as you do so.
> [{quoted}](name=BLU Medic,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=L6q06Y88,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2015-05-14T19:14:33.313+0000) > > It's not that hard to write fast and use correct punctuation as you do so. I know it's not incredibly difficult to do if you're a fast typer, but I type around 160 WPM and I never do it. It's not necessary to communication in a game. What matters more is if your words actually make sense. A comma in the middle of a sentence for reading clarity makes 100x more sense (just by key position alone) than it does to capitalize first letter of a message and add a period at the end (which could be entirely omitted for 90% of messages). > [{quoted}](name=Watchmen Walter,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=L6q06Y88,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2015-05-14T19:06:14.570+0000) > > I'm pretty sure only the lowest rung of human society gets annoyed by people who respect their own education. Except it's in a video game where you need to respond as quickly as possible. Also, nobody cares about your ability to capitalize the first letter of every sentence or typing periods, so why bother stretching your pinky to do it? You could be doing something better. > [{quoted}](name=Sewer Rat,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=L6q06Y88,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2015-05-14T19:15:30.247+0000) > > N**o, n**o! You're clearly in the wrong here! We all need to step down what little English grammar we have left **in order to** accommodate for those, such as the OP, who couldn't afford such a fabulous education. How dare you be so inconsiderate of the OP's disability! > > I think it **would be** best that we get rid of education altogether so everyone can be on equal terms! It's ironic that people try to talk about anyone's education when I'm clearly able to use proper grammar in an appropriate setting. Also, since we're on that note, I fixed your poorly written post.
: It depends on who it is. Don't think most of them are trying to be pretentious but they're probably used to it cuz of frequent essays etc etc. There's several reasons out there
> [{quoted}](name=Noisey Ness,realm=EUW,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=L6q06Y88,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2015-05-14T19:05:35.065+0000) > > It depends on who it is. Don't think most of them are trying to be pretentious but they're probably used to it cuz of frequent essays etc etc. There's several reasons out there Nobody I know has ever tried to type a proper sentence while in game unless they were doing it with the intent of pissing people off or making their language read differently. They're incredibly smart people, too. That's why I assume people who do that are just trying to sound smart and, possibly, intentionally pretentious.
Rioter Comments
: \>not having OrbitalDropKick in there
> [{quoted}](name=The Vi Guy,realm=EUNE,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=i5lnkb6l,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2015-05-05T21:51:17.367+0000) > > \>not having OrbitalDropKick in there tru I should add him. I'm updating it as I remember more of the old names
Dokusei (NA)
: i have the strongest feeling you purchased a season one account and are pretending to be something you are not. especially since all you do is play normals. You probably just play to get placed and then play to not decay
> [{quoted}](name=Dokusei,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=i5lnkb6l,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2015-05-05T21:52:13.257+0000) > > i have the strongest feeling you purchased a season one account and are pretending to be something you are not. > > especially since all you do is play normals. You probably just play to get placed and then play to not decay I have the strongest feeling you're an upset toddler that can't accept that his forum hangout isn't special and the people here hold delusions about how great they are Especially since you stalk threads. You probably just cry in GD chat and then post to not lose "street cred"
LoopKat (NA)
: @Riot Why are my Team Builder queues so terrible? [NA East]
Supports tend to nitpick teams the most. Funny thing is 90% of supports I find are the lowest Elo in any given teambuilder lobby. Bunch of noobs thinking they're godsends. And then also adc, support, jungler rarely stay unless they're the last one (or 2nd to last) to join the lobby. It's a really garbage system since they're not punished for requeueing instantly.
: If the GD list doesn't include me it's incomplete.
> [{quoted}](name=Challengur Smerf,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=i5lnkb6l,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-05-05T20:22:51.311+0000) > > If the GD list doesn't include me it's incomplete. Any list _without_ you is complete.
: How do you guys feel about this item idea?
It should just instantly close the game at that point, like a drophack. Just kick everyone and wish this never happened. If you add that then this item will be ok
Jikker (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Happy Merchant ,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=i5lnkb6l,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2015-05-05T20:24:11.041+0000) > > Exactly. People like Renekton Bot and the oldest posters are the only "actual GDers" from when this place was more active and less shitty. > > Except the "official list" consists 90% of the OP's circlejerk friends who only went active 2 years ago, max. > > People who only started posting 2 years ago deserve only to be on a list of "Cancer Patients Need Treatment" I started posting in late 2012.......I guess I'll go start my cancer treatments
> [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=i5lnkb6l,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2015-05-05T20:25:42.502+0000) > > I started posting in late 2012.......I guess I'll go start my cancer treatments Well, it depends if you're in the group of people who frequent the GD chatroom.
: am i the only one who thinks those oldfags were shitposters and needed banned?
> [{quoted}](name=DullToast,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=i5lnkb6l,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-05-05T20:23:29.949+0000) > > am i the only one who thinks those oldfags were shitposters and needed banned? 90% of the time yes, 10% of the time no.
Jikker (NA)
: Actually, when I think GDer, Renekton Bot is the first name to spring to mind
> [{quoted}](name=Jikker,realm=NA,application-id=mNBeEEkI,discussion-id=i5lnkb6l,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-05-05T20:22:16.528+0000) > > Actually, when I think GDer, Renekton Bot is the first name to spring to mind Exactly. People like Renekton Bot and the oldest posters are the only "actual GDers" from when this place was more active and less shitty. Except the "official list" consists 90% of the OP's circlejerk friends who only went active 2 years ago, max. People who only started posting 2 years ago deserve only to be on a list of "Cancer Patients Need Treatment"
Show more

NaCl Shaker

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion