annoyed and sad: that i don't remember what it feels like to be genuinely happy or excited about...anything really.

i mean, sure i'm really looking forward to getting that sonic mania game but i was just thinking and in all likelihood i won't feel any and i mean ANY excitement or real happiness while playing it. i don't remember the last time any video game left me feeling that way. or pretty much anything else for that matter.

that's also partly why i don't like thinking about it. it just makes me feel worse about it.

i mean, sure theres the initial burst of happiness and excitement but once that's gone it's straight back to "-_- whatever..."

that i can still laugh at things and show any form of happiness or joy at all is probably nothing short of a miracle at this point.

hmmm...i guess it's not surprising then, how i tend to react rather negatively to anything that bothers me. well, more so than most people might.

:/ i can't think of a single thing i want to do right now and i hate it when that happens.

edit: huh, guess this one makes 1200 replies in this thread.

Welcome to the club.

I still don't have a picture of the joke that originated my defining character : a wasp in an SS officer's uniform.

People who are all about how they've never had X problem with Y piece of machinery and because of this all complaints about X problem are nonsense. Just because you haven't had a problem with your computer does NOT automatically mean that nobody else in the whole wide world has it either. Your personal experience does not imply that your way is the only right way.

InannaEloah said:
People who are all about how they've never had X problem with Y piece of machinery and because of this all complaints about X problem are nonsense. Just because you haven't had a problem with your computer does NOT automatically mean that nobody else in the whole wide world has it either. Your personal experience does not imply that your way is the only right way.

we sure do run across some fun (sarcasm) people, don't we? like usual: been there, seen that.

this example is especially bad if it somehow comes from someone working in tech support. in that case they should be fired and replaced.

edit: was just checking my notifications and stuff on inkbunny and saw this. looks like discord has updated its ToS which might prove annoying for some.

also, not cool with the kinkshaming comments, you jerks (discord).

treos said:
we sure do run across some fun (sarcasm) people, don't we? like usual: been there, seen that.

this example is especially bad if it somehow comes from someone working in tech support. in that case they should be fired and replaced.

edit: was just checking my notifications and stuff on inkbunny and saw this. looks like discord has updated its ToS which might prove annoying for some.

also, not cool with the kinkshaming comments, you jerks (discord).

Yeah we do, lol

Also, I saw that journal and commented on it. It's like, they're jerks just because they can be in this case.

The advertising on e621.
Necessary or not, you can't honestly tell me that's not annoying.

Sasha721 said:

The advertising on e621.
Necessary or not,       you can't honestly tell me that's                                   [i] not [/i]                              annoying.

You can use adblock if you don't like them.

This Outlast 2 review made me pretty angry.
http://www.slantmagazine.com/games/review/outlast-2

Furrin_Gok said:Edited to show all of the spaces you included on your own. Why all the spaces?

Edited to remove the spoilers because they were obviously there to hide a comment on what was most likely a harmless formatting incompatibility that you could have asked about in a DM. Just saying.

People who expect others to care about their tragedies when they don't care about the tragedies of others.

BlueDingo said:
People who expect others to care about their tragedies when they don't care about the tragedies of others.

Loooots of people like that unfortunately, especially if it's something they can't relate to. I remember an old friend laughed when my cat of 18 years passed away because he didn't like cats and thought they were useless, but of course I'm sure he would've punched my in the face if his dog died and I laughed. Not my friend anymore.

Ignorance

BlueDingo said:
People who expect others to care about their tragedies when they don't care about the tragedies of others.

yeah...that's probably gonna get irritating for me too one of these days due to the whole...slowly dying emotions and all.

a family member could die and i probably wouldn't shed a tear at this point. -_-

i wonder what a psychiatrist might say if i told them about this. sorry, but i can't really say i'm happy or excited about anything because...apparently i no longer have the ability to show or feel strong positive emotions. is this a particularly bad thing or a problem or something.

and then likely comes some form of medicine. which i REALLY wouldn't want to take as the thought of something screwing with my mind like that sounds disturbing at the very least.

treos said:
yeah...that's probably gonna get irritating for me too one of these days due to the whole...slowly dying emotions and all.

a family member could die and i probably wouldn't shed a tear at this point. -_-

i wonder what a psychiatrist might say if i told them about this. sorry, but i can't really say i'm happy or excited about anything because...apparently i no longer have the ability to show or feel strong positive emotions. is this a particularly bad thing or a problem or something.

and then likely comes some form of medicine. which i REALLY wouldn't want to take as the thought of something screwing with my mind like that sounds disturbing at the very least.

You should probably talk to someone if you can't feel. They can't make you take anything but they might try to push it on you. You can always say no absolutely not I only want to do talk therapy, which helps a lot of people. Usually they just tell you of small ways to improve your life as a whole. But they might be able to force if you have a meltdown and are seen as a danger to yourself and others and are submitted to the hospital.

Online companies who harass you with emails after you have repeatedly unsubscribed from them, and who shouldn't even have your email address in the first place.

"Unsubscribe" means "unsubscribe," it does NOT mean "please keep sending me more of your shit."

InannaEloah said:
Online companies who harass you with emails after you have repeatedly unsubscribed from them, and who shouldn't even have your email address in the first place.

"Unsubscribe" means "unsubscribe," it does NOT mean "please keep sending me more of your shit."

Then there's the ones that subscribe you to 20 other things behind your back so you get harassed by them as well.

Cuddledump said:
You should probably talk to someone if you can't feel. They can't make you take anything but they might try to push it on you. You can always say no absolutely not I only want to do talk therapy, which helps a lot of people. Usually they just tell you of small ways to improve your life as a whole. But they might be able to force if you have a meltdown and are seen as a danger to yourself and others and are submitted to the hospital.

:/ i'll keep that in mind if it ever comes up.

right now? the 2nd boss of Nioh, Onryoki. seriously, wtf had the bright idea of making this boss THIS hard? all of my attacks barely scratch the bosses hp bar while he can take me out in around 4 hits. how the fuck is that fair or a remotely balanced fight?

i mean, until i beat this thing i can't upgrade my equipment or anything aside from what i get in this 2nd mission which, compared to this boss, is complete vendor trash at best.

oh sure, i can follow the bosses pattern just fine but if i slip up even once BOOM! 1/4-1/3 of my health gone in a single blow. this is ridiculous.

about 2-3 minutes in *still not at the 75% mark* boom boom boom boom *finally at the 75% mark* oh great, now his move set changes completely and is even harder to avoid.

what, is every boss going to be this big of a difficulty spike and have such high defense that i can barely hurt them at all?

edit: that may be it for my time in nioh already. fighting that boss is like fighting an enemy in a MMORPG where your ten lvls too low and the target has a skull by the name that pretty much says you WILL die if you fight it.

if i could just get some better equipment or SOMETHING to help. i could beat it. and forget about multiplayer. no PS+ means no multiplayer even if i do let the game update.

treos said:
That one boss...

Considering he's several times your size, it'd be weird if he didn't do more damage than you.

One thing that annoys me is when the strength and abilities of an enemy are not reflected in their appearance whatsoever. There's nothing like finding a tiny spider that is over 10 times as powerful as the giant boss spider from the same area. No amount of leveling up should be able to make something that small more powerful than something that big.

BlueDingo said:
Considering he's several times your size, it'd be weird if he didn't do more damage than you.

One thing that annoys me is when the strength and abilities of an enemy are not reflected in their appearance whatsoever. There's nothing like finding a tiny spider that is over 10 times as powerful as the giant boss spider from the same area. No amount of leveling up should be able to make something that small more powerful than something that big.

well, after redoing and grinding in the 2nd mission that fat slob finally went down. and on the first try this time no less. :)

treos said:
well, after redoing and grinding in the 2nd mission that fat slob finally went down. and on the first try this time no less. :)

Come to think of it, Valkyria Chronicles has points where you need to grind training missions to get your soldiers strong enough

omg...

French Elections: Emmanuel Macron, a Disaster

"Above all, Emmanuel Macron, a candidate close to Hollande won the race and will be elected President on May 7. He was Hollande's senior economic advisor for more than two years, and the main architect of Hollande's failed economic policies."

WTF, FRANCE?! ಠ_ಠ

treos said:
omg...

French Elections: Emmanuel Macron, a Disaster

"Above all, Emmanuel Macron, a candidate close to Hollande won the race and will be elected President on May 7. He was Hollande's senior economic advisor for more than two years, and the main architect of Hollande's failed economic policies."

WTF, FRANCE?! ಠ_ಠ

Jeeze, that entire article reads like a propaganda piece. You might want to consider looking for other sources.

treos said:
"French Elections: Emmanuel Macron, a Disaster"

WTF, FRANCE?! ಠ_ಠ

The other option is likely worse. Modern politics, hell yeah.

LumenSageAlexander said:
Jeeze, that entire article reads like a propaganda piece. You might want to consider looking for other sources.

such as? i know i'm not going to anything mainstream. fox maybe but i'm not about to trust any of the other mainstream news sources.

and as others have pointed out before. fox is probably only doing good cause they like trump so even that may be temporary.

hslugs said:
The other option is likely worse. Modern politics, hell yeah.

From what I've heard the choice was basically an incompetent boob (Emmanuel) or a fascist. I'm thinking electing Emmanuel was the right call given the choices available.

treos said:
fox is probably only doing good cause they like trump so even that may be temporary.

Well there's your problem! You still trust Trump.

LumenSageAlexander said:
Well there's your problem! You still trust Trump.

beats listening to the mainstream fake news and those who only seek to attack him without acknowledging any of the good he's done so far and yes, he has made some things better.

Trump's farce of a healthcare proposal passed.

People are going to die.

LumenSageAlexander said:
Trump's farce of a healthcare proposal passed.

People are going to die.

I hope that wasn't not what I think it was. Otherwise, I'M people.

kamimatsu said:
I hope that wasn't not what I think it was. Otherwise, I'M people.

Apparently it only passed in the House of Representatives. It still has some hoops to jump through before it's a law.

I'm not optimistic lately, though.

But yes, it's basically the repeal of the ACA - also known as Obamacare - and its replacement with a "healthcare proposal" that's no such thing.

LumenSageAlexander said:
Trump's farce of a healthcare proposal passed.

People are going to die.

kamimatsu said:
I hope that wasn't not what I think it was. Otherwise, I'M people.

oh look, more people who think getting rid of that disaster known as obamacare will result in deaths. obamacare was a bad idea right from the start.

maybe with trump's changes i could finally get health insurance...again.

treos said:
oh look, more people who think getting rid of that disaster known as obamacare will result in deaths. obamacare was a bad idea right from the start.

maybe with trump's changes i could finally get health insurance...again.

People who WOULD have died without proper coverage survived thanks to Obamacare, and many of them didn't have to pay bank-breaking co-pays as a result.

Ergo, yes. People are going to die as a direct result of the ACA being shut down, if that is what ends up happening. I'm sorry that you don't want to accept that Trump has been driving to erase something that saved peoples' lives, but it's there.

I don't know much about Obamacare but from what I've heard, it sounds a little bit like the Medicare system we have here. Is anyone here familiar enough with both to confirm that?

LumenSageAlexander said:
People who WOULD have died without proper coverage survived thanks to Obamacare, and many of them didn't have to pay bank-breaking co-pays as a result.

Heheheh I'm sorry I just had to log on and respond to this one.

Do you know what else will allow people to have healthcare without having to pay bank-breaking co-pays? COMPETITIVE HEALTHCARE, Believe it or not having healthcare companies compete across state lines will drive healthcare prices down because companies will lower their prices and offer better services so more people will sign on with them vs their competitors whom will do the same thing.

And Trump has talked about this, He is in favor of this last I heard. Now I can't say I know much about the current proposal because I haven't seen anything on it, and therefor can't say if it really Trumpcare or yet another Ryancare, even just the ACA reformed.

Also the ACA may have saved some lives but at some point it going to ruin more then it saves because of the way its setup. Hell I've seen a couple of instances where it nearly caused homelessness! Course I can't find those stories anymore(Hmmm I wonder why -Stares at MSM-)

Actually you know maybe I should find that video again that talks about why the ACA should be changed or reformed. Yeah I think I might try to queue it up for any farther disagreement.

And before you decide to say it, no I do not particularly like Trump but there are some issues that he is right on.

United_Gamers said:
Heheheh I'm sorry I just had to log and respond to this one.

This guy.

EightyNine said:
This guy.

Don't take that the wrong way. I'm not giggling at the prospect of people dying, I'm not a monster, but I am laughing at the idea of federal healthcare like its going to save the world, that everyone seems to cling to.

Course if was a low flat tax to pay for federal healthcare I wouldn't mind so much. I'd still have a problem with it because it would massively inefficient, but I wouldn't be as. Heatedly opposed to it as I am.

United_Gamers said:
Do you know what else will allow people to have healthcare without having to pay bank-breaking co-pays? COMPETITIVE HEALTHCARE, Believe it or not having healthcare companies compete across state lines will drive healthcare prices down because companies will lower their prices and offer better services so more people will sign on with them vs their competitors whom will do the same thing.

exactly! something people seem to forget is that competition is good for any market.

I mean don't get me wrong, I understand there are some issues Trump is 'right' on. After all, on any issue more complicated than "Build a wall to keep the Mexicans out" or "We need to make America how it USED to be" or "The Chinese are economically cucking America" he basically just pulls whatever sounds nice at the moment out of his ass without any thought to what he's said about it before. The man is inconsistent as fuck, I'm sorry, and it has a lot to do with his whole STYLE of public speaking where he talks and he talks and he talks and he SAYS fuck-all. Maybe he isn't bland to listen to like people accused Kerry of being, but he's just not qualified to be President.

Like seriously, Donald Trump is the physical embodiment of Give 'Em The Ol' Razzle Dazzle in politics.

Also, we might be able to pay for more things if we weren't bending over backwards to tax the wealthy as little as possible. The upper-crust are already benefitting the most from America's legal systems and institutions, why the fuck should they get a discount on paying for its services? (We can joke ALL we want about "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" being scary-ass words, but the government actually DOES do important shit, believe it or not.)

United_Gamers said:
Don't take that the wrong way. I'm not giggling at the prospect of people dying, I'm not a monster, but I am laughing at the idea of federal healthcare like its going to save the world, that everyone seems to cling to.

Course if was a low flat tax to pay for federal healthcare I wouldn't mind so much. I'd still have a problem with it because it would massively inefficient, but I wouldn't be as. Heatedly opposed to it as I am.

I don't think it'll save the world. I just think not saving the world isn't enough to automatically discard something. Just because something isn't ideal, that doesn't mean it's automatically the worst. Neither scenario is ideal, but at this point it's a matter of damage control.

treos said:
exactly! something people seem to forget is that competition is good for any market.

Last time this happened, it took the founding of the FDA to start fixing things. The problem is people assuming that Laissez-faire is the only possible type of Capitalism and anything apart from that is somehow the equivalent of Socialism.

LumenSageAlexander said:
I mean don't get me wrong, I understand there are some issues Trump is 'right' on. After all, on any issue more complicated than "Build a wall to keep the Mexicans out" or "We need to make America how it USED to be" or "The Chinese are economically cucking America" he basically just pulls whatever sounds nice at the moment out of his ass without any thought to what he's said about it before. The man is inconsistent as fuck, I'm sorry, and it has a lot to do with his whole STYLE of public speaking where he talks and he talks and he talks and he SAYS fuck-all. Maybe he isn't bland to listen to like people accused Kerry of being, but he's just not qualified to be President.

Okay I kinda get where your coming from. First I'll tackle the wall issue. I don't think its really to "keep the mexicans out" Its actually more then just them and the wall really isn't meant for keeping them out it meant to control immigration. Especially if your in favor of "Free" healthcare uncontrolled immigration will cripple the nation being as could be more undocumented who don't pay into the tax system vs those whom are documented and do pay into it.

But that's not the only reason. There are diseases that have been wiped out of the US that still exists in other parts of the world, and if someone had this disease and they came over and no one not even the government then a pandemic could most likely happen and once again cripple the nation.

As for "We need to make America how it USED to be" I don't think I ever heard him say it needs to go back to the way it used to be. As that would be difficult to any way. we are much different today then we were like 20-40 years ago. But I do agree with Make America Great Again, because in some sense this nation has fallen and does need to be proped back up.

I don't have enough knowledge to say anything on the Chinese. However we do need to stop sending our industry over there. Not only is it good for the American people to be working but it also might help the environment quite a bit, as we have environmental protection policies that the Chinese just do not have, and if man-made climate change is real thing then stopping sending industry there, and Indonesia is something you should favor no matter what you think of Trump.

Also Trump is indeed qualified as there is no qualification for president, that's what the founding fathers intended by the way, anyone can run for office, because there is no set standard, no training, no qualification. Think about it. What was Washington's background before he became first president? I mean unless you just really want corrupt, rich, politicians(Which ties into the tax thing I'm going to mention.) running the nation all the time.

As for taxing the rich. Well they already are taxed quite a bit, yet they never pay in much, why is that? Could be oh I don't rich, politicians running for office saying to the public "And this how much the rich will pay" and then making loopholes for them to use so they can avoid it pay very little. And Trump himself has admitted to using these same loophole himself. Lol and he still payed more taxes then some others even while using said loopholes. To be honest I would rather have rich people Actually paying like 15% vs paying 5% and pretending they pay like 30% or 40%

And lastly. Yes government has its purpose, and some of it is impotent, but too much power for them is a bad thing. After all absolute power corrupts absolutely. This why government needs to go back to being small and quite a few agencies need to go away, because a lot of that responsibility overlaps(NSA, FBI, and CIA for example) And not only that but a lot of what the government has taken on can be run much more effectively at the state level in fact it would actually be a massive improvement. Improved Education, less federal spending, improved Infrastructure, hell you made America pretty damn impressive right there.

kamimatsu said:
Last time this happened, it took the founding of the FDA to start fixing things. The problem is people assuming that Laissez-faire is the only possible type of Capitalism and anything apart from that is somehow the equivalent of Socialism.

Okay granted, but still competition in not a bad thing between companies. Plus I think the FDA has been slipping because of too much regulation. You may argue "All that regulation helps though, it sets a standard and forces people to not take the lazy route" sure for little while and while there are bigger companies whom can afford abide by all that regulation. But the smaller upstarts suffer. Din't get me wrong I don't want say a restaurant to get lazy with their food and poison someone, but when you have too much regulation something slips, some ends up poisoned anyway and whoop "FDA bad take down the FDA" So on, so on. Which is why trump proposed "For every new regulation, two old regulations must be removed."

United_Gamers said:
Improved Education, less federal spending, improved Infrastructure, hell you made America pretty damn impressive right there.

What about the fact that recently the lower spending has been from not spending it on education?

As for the wall, I'm convinced it's not to keep others out, but to keep us in.

kamimatsu said:
What about the fact that recently the lower spending has been from not spending it on education?

Don't need to spend money to make all the Activests, and Antifa members that come out of them, and just poor education in general. Which leads me to ask. Is that really a good thing?

That's enough politics.

on the topic of education. some of...no, a LOT of those activists leave me wondering if they went to school at all when i come across them sometimes. cause many of them don't understand basic concepts, biology, or what they're even fighting for/against at all. as well as how the heck someone so lacking in knowledge could ever have made it anywhere close to college. money probably but still...it's completely ridiculous how little they know about whatever it is they choose to fight against or advocate for.

what was it that one person i came across a while back didn't understand? oh, right.

basic biology, the difference between a request and a demand... how respect is something you earn, not something you're entitled to (well, that's not so much education related but still)... the difference between respect and courtesy...

and this person likely made it to college. crazy...absolutely crazy...

huh, i just remembered something funny but off topic. i am banned from the feminist subreddit. why? because i made a single post pointing out that misandry DOES exist. lol less than 24 hours iirc and that's all i did. no baiting or flaming, just pointed out that fact.

facts and truth: the arch nemesis of activists everywhere!

Ratte said:
That's enough politics.

Politics sounds like something that fits in the angry thread.

Sorrowless said:
Politics sounds like something that fits in the angry thread.

Well, considering this rule...:

Major Religions, Religious Figures, Political Parties, or Political Figures
Suggested Suspension Length: 3 days
This category includes:
-Any discussion in forum posts, threads, or comments regarding major political parties or political figures

...I'm surprised that it was allowed to go on for several pages.

Genjar said:
Well, considering that this in the rules...:
...I'm surprised that it was allowed to go on for several pages.

So politics are ok as long as we don't mention any major parties or figures? Good to know.

Going a set speed on the motorway, 70 mph. Car overtakes really slowly and plonks itself in front of you and slows down to 60 or less, why?

rhyolite said:
Going a set speed on the motorway, 70 mph. Car overtakes really slowly and plonks itself in front of you and slows down to 60 or less, why?

Because the driver is a dick and just wants to assert their dominance probably.

Genjar said:
Major Religions, Religious Figures, Political Parties, or Political Figures
Suggested Suspension Length: 3 days
This category includes:
-Any discussion in forum posts, threads, or comments regarding major political parties or political figures

Wouldn't discussing obamacare be outside of that ruling?

LumenSageAlexander said:
Because the driver is a dick and just wants to assert their dominance probably.

Yeah, had that a few times, I'l over take to 80 for a short time, settle down to 70, the car seems a speck in the rear view mirror. then half a mile before the next turning they accelerate, shoot past, signal then turn off.
Flash or pip you just get a finger so I don't bother. British drivers.

Sorrowless said:
So politics are ok as long as we don't mention any major parties or figures? Good to know.

Considering that politics is literally based on those parties I highly suggest following Ratte's statement.

Today, I saw an ambulance driver texting and driving in a busy highway. Drivers texting peeve me.

Frigis said:
Today, I saw an ambulance driver texting and driving in a busy highway. Drivers texting peeve me.

What's he gonna do if he crashes, call an ambulance?

BlueDingo said:
What's he gonna do if he crashes, call an ambulance?

How about the people in the car he crashes into?

You know what I do to people who text and drive, and when my car pulls up next to them at a traffic stop? I roll down my window and flip them off right as it turns green. I do the same with people who cut me off, and then I see them on their phone.

fox_whisper85 said:
You know what I do to people who text and drive, and when my car pulls up next to them at a traffic stop? I roll down my window and flip them off right as it turns green. I do the same with people who cut me off, and then I see them on their phone.

What if you drove in front of them and ever so slightly drove slower so that they'll bump into you, forcing them to pay attention? Okay, that's probably not a good idea.

Sorrowless said:
What if you drove in front of them and ever so slightly drove slower so that they'll bump into you, forcing them to pay attention? Okay, that's probably not a good idea.

Tempting to do a brake-check, but I don't want to have to pay for increased premiums. I just get next to them, stare them down and then flip them off to where I know they see me flipping them off. Immature? Sure. Illegal? No, flipping off people is a first amendment right as ruled by the supreme court, oddly enough. Slow drivers, people who text or talk while driving, people who cut me off, they all get the finger.

fox_whisper85 said:
No, flipping off people is a first amendment right as ruled by the supreme court, oddly enough.

o.O really? never heard of that but then again, far stranger things are legal/illegal. like how it's illegal to molest an automobile in oklahoma.

treos said:
o.O really? never heard of that but then again, far stranger things are legal/illegal. like how it's illegal to molest an automobile in oklahoma.

That's probably for safety reasons. I don't think having exhaust residue on your dick is in any way good for you.

BlueDingo said:
That's probably for safety reasons. I don't think having exhaust residue on your dick is in any way good for you.

lol

Playing HotS with a bunch of noobs who are only there for the D.Va skin and don't even care about winning...seriously...why did Blizzard make it so that they can finish the quest without even WINNING?

Last time you didn't even have to play against people, this time they forced people PvP...so NEXT TIME...make them have to WIN! That way they actually care and don't AFK half the match or just stop playing when they start losing. Hate it.

treos said:
o.O really? never heard of that but then again, far stranger things are legal/illegal. like how it's illegal to molest an automobile in oklahoma.

In New York, in siome parts at least, women may go topless only if it is not used as a business stunt. I guess they wanted to do something about prostitution but didn't want to say "prostitute" or something?

Dyrone said:
Playing HotS with a bunch of noobs who are only there for the D.Va skin and don't even care about winning...seriously...why did Blizzard make it so that they can finish the quest without even WINNING?

Last time you didn't even have to play against people, this time they forced people PvP...so NEXT TIME...make them have to WIN! That way they actually care and don't AFK half the match or just stop playing when they start losing. Hate it.

I haven't played this game (Heroes of the Storm, right?) so I'm going into this blind.

I'm guessing the quest winning conditions and the match winning conditions are different, making it possible to complete one without the other. What happens if you win a match without completing the quest(s) within it?

Hollow victories are never fun. It's just not satisfying at all when you know your opponent either isn't good enough to pose a challenge or isn't trying.

The quests are outside the matches. These quests give rewards in Overwatch (a different Blizzard game), which has brought a lot of Overwatch players who hate MOBAs into Heroes of the Storm. They are of the form "Play 5 games in [typical PVP modes]". Win or lose, it counts. This is consistent with most HOTS quests (there's a "win 3 games" quest, but most are "play X games as a Y hero"), but is distinguished in requiring a PVP mode. I've heard lots of reports of Overwatch shitheads deliberately attempting to throw the game because they just want 5 losses as fast as possible. I've also heard occasional reports of both teams noticing that Overwatch shitheads are trying to throw and dragging the game out to 40+ minutes (most matches are over in 20-25 minutes), which gives me a bit of a justice boner.

I will note that the Overwatch community generally seems to disapprove of the aforementioned shitheads.

BlueDingo said:
I haven't played this game (Heroes of the Storm, right?) so I'm going into this blind.

I'm guessing the quest winning conditions and the match winning conditions are different, making it possible to complete one without the other. What happens if you win a match without completing the quest(s) within it?

Hollow victories are never fun. It's just not satisfying at all when you know your opponent either isn't good enough to pose a challenge or isn't trying.

You. Would be mildly surprised. When I used to play Halo a lot I would always find that one AFK guy and that one bastard that always sought them out because easy points. Which actually kinda always pissed me off. I mean its easy to get mad and go for the easy kill because of 4 or 5 bad games but these guys made campers look like welcome house guests.

kamimatsu said:
In New York, in siome parts at least, women may go topless only if it is not used as a business stunt. I guess they wanted to do something about prostitution but didn't want to say "prostitute" or something?

actually, that one likely has to do with that thing where it's typically fine and no one would protest if men were going around topless while people would complain if women did the same.

man removes his shirt. everyone else: "meh"

woman removes her shirt. everyone else: "oh noes, she haz bewbs! quick, cover her bewbs and make her decent again!"

the same logic can be seen when it comes to female nipples.

in fact, i've commented on this here some times as well. like, why is a pic of sally acorn with breasts but no nipples (and her wearing her vest) considered a "safe" pic while the same pic could have her with nipples showing and suddenly it has to be "questionable" or something. why? that's just stupid and we all know it is. well...most of us do.

treos said:
actually, that one likely has to do with that thing where it's typically fine and no one would protest if men were going around topless while people would complain if women did the same.

man removes his shirt. everyone else: "meh"

woman removes her shirt. everyone else: "oh noes, she haz bewbs! quick, cover her bewbs and make her decent again!"

the same logic can be seen when it comes to female nipples.

Which would be more legal, a woman wearing only a micro bikini or a woman wearing a niqab with nipple cutouts? My money's on the bikini.

treos said:
in fact, i've commented on this here some times as well. like, why is a pic of sally acorn with breasts but no nipples (and her wearing her vest) considered a "safe" pic while the same pic could have her with nipples showing and suddenly it has to be "questionable" or something. why? that's just stupid and we all know it is. well...most of us do.

My theory is it's because lady nipples are pink things (usually, there's also brown ones) that excrete liquid. Think about it for a moment: The only other body parts that must be censored from media at all costs in most countries are the glans penis (a pink thing that excretes liquid) and the clitoris (a pink thing that excretes liquid). Male ones (mostly) don't excrete liquid and coincidentally, are rarely censored.

Just about the only way to get a salary increase from the company I work for was to quit, and then have them entice you back.

(essentially a dumb policy, as it would be more cost effective to have reasonable increases based on performance)

Now they have instituted a 'no re-hire' policy in an attempt to curb this ... behaviour. Couple this with essentially no pay increases for anyone, ever, and all I can see happening is a steady exodus.

On that note, I have a job interview coming up Friday.

BlueDingo said:
Which would be more legal, a woman wearing only a micro bikini or a woman wearing a niqab with nipple cutouts? My money's on the bikini.

could probably push things as far as those nipple pasty things really. might raise some concerns and a few comments but nothing major.

huh...you know, maybe that's partly why you see females with band-aids across their nipples and pussy in japanese stuff sometimes.

treos said:
could probably push things as far as those nipple pasty things really. might raise some concerns and a few comments but nothing major.

huh...you know, maybe that's partly why you see females with band-aids across their nipples and pussy in japanese stuff sometimes.

Remember this post?

BlueDingo said:
Remember this post?

well, that's japan, and with them it's to be expected. i wonder if that video i saw on trutv is still on youtube somewhere. i don't remember which country it was from but for some reason they had the feet of those in the video censored. why the feet when the character in said video removed their shoes? i have no idea but that's stranger than japans censorship.

BlueDingo said:
the clitoris (a pink thing that excretes liquid)

...clitoris does not excrete any considerable amounts of liquid. if it does, its probably seriously infected or something.

treos said:
actually, that one likely has to do with that thing where it's typically fine and no one would protest if men were going around topless while people would complain if women did the same.

man removes his shirt. everyone else: "meh"

woman removes her shirt. everyone else: "oh noes, she haz bewbs! quick, cover her bewbs and make her decent again!"

the same logic can be seen when it comes to female nipples.

in fact, i've commented on this here some times as well. like, why is a pic of sally acorn with breasts but no nipples (and her wearing her vest) considered a "safe" pic while the same pic could have her with nipples showing and suddenly it has to be "questionable" or something. why? that's just stupid and we all know it is. well...most of us do.

I probably am the least qualified to explain the current reason, since I don't associate nudity with sexuality and just don't want to make things uncomfortable for people who do (or too comfortable).

I do know that ankles used to be considered vulgar, and any form of the words "pants" or "leg" was seen as profanity, and replaced with "trousers" or "limb". Elvis was also considered too sexual just for swinging his hips, and was seen the same way a lot of people see twerking today (though honestly twerking leaves much less to the imagination).