Boredom takes fight.... – Forum Archive : stripcreator

Forum archives » Fights Go Here » Boredom takes fight....

little_kitty February 19, 2004 8:44 PM	In a new feeling of boredom and un-comic-genious-ness, I feel this amazing urge to get into a fight. About what, i don't know. But I beg of anyone... Start a fight with me, one that needs the usage of at least part of the brain that I once used... Be it philosophical or religious debate, I care not. But please...Someone make me think. I know that my brain would appreciate it. Thank you.
Post #124906	link

Spankling February 19, 2004 8:54 PM	You wanna fight? C'mon girly! you may look tough but... ah... who am I kidding. Mop up the floor with me already.
Post #124910	link

DragonXero February 19, 2004 9:46 PM	You have to lick her boot first, spankling! Have I taught you nothing?
Post #124918	link

Zaster
February 19, 2004 10:32 PM

I'll take a crack at this. I have no idea what your world-view is, Little Kitty, but its philosophical underpinning are fundamentally flawed. As a result, your political leanings (whatever they may be) are totally unrealistic, and your opinions on such diverse matters as religion, art, and music, are (I assume) completely laughable. In fact, your entire life is pretty much an endless series of wrong-headed choices. I can't cite any specific examples, mind you, but... hey, Look over there -- something shiny! In conclusion, I would just like to point out that whatever it is you cherish and value most is pretty much just a big pile of steaming monkey doo.

Rebuttal?

Post #124922

link

dcomposed
February 19, 2004 10:44 PM

quote:
Start a fight with me

kitty, when I'm talking to you, you're constantly complain about something. I don't think there's anything left you haven't complained about, but here's two things you have a lot:

1) You're lonely.
2) Some guy is hitting on you.

For most lonely, straight girls, some guy hitting on them is a good thing. Why do you cry about both and not just fuck every guy you can? You seem to like sex a lot, so it seems stupid not to.

ps camwhore

Oh, and you seem to think you're better than everyone else, ie: recent fight with nicejohnson. Where you didn't like that she (the new girl) pm'd you (the girl everyone loves) without knowing you first. I remember you doing the same when you were new. You also seem to think that because everyone likes you, you can just ask one of your mod buddies to take action against something and they'll do it, ie:

[17:49:04] Lumi, you have no idea what power I hold against you, dude.
[17:49:14] I'm real chummy witha good number of mod's on this site
[17:49:24] one word of your extreme cuntiness, and I can get you booted

Not only can mods (probably) not ban anyone, I doubt they would just because you say they're a cunt. You can flirt with the mods all you like, but you're still just a n00b.

And you listen to the most annoying, dumb radio music ever.

Post #124924

link

MikeyG February 20, 2004 6:40 AM	Um...looks like you got yourself a fight, Kitten.
Post #124952	link

Beaz February 20, 2004 7:13 AM	My thoughts are represented through my I.T. Guy (me) /comics/Beaz/213014/
Post #124967	link

little_kitty
February 20, 2004 9:00 AM

quote:

kitty, when I'm talking to you, you're constantly complain about something. I don't think there's anything left you haven't complained about, but here's two things you have a lot:

1) You're lonely.
2) Some guy is hitting on you.

For most lonely, straight girls, some guy hitting on them is a good thing. Why do you cry about both and not just fuck every guy you can? You seem to like sex a lot, so it seems stupid not to.

ps camwhore

Oh, and you seem to think you're better than everyone else, ie: recent fight with nicejohnson. Where you didn't like that she (the new girl) pm'd you (the girl everyone loves) without knowing you first. I remember you doing the same when you were new. You also seem to think that because everyone likes you, you can just ask one of your mod buddies to take action against something and they'll do it...

Not only can mods (probably) not ban anyone, I doubt they would just because you say they're a cunt. You can flirt with the mods all you like, but you're still just a n00b.

And you listen to the most annoying, dumb radio music ever.

Wow. I didn't realise that you had that much against me, dcom. When I started this thread, I wanted something that would challenge my mind, like a different perspective on religion or whatever, not a personal attack against me. But seeing as that's the only thing that's being thrown out there, I'll have to respond.

I didn't realise that I was complaining that much, but apparently that's all that I ever did whilst talking to you, so I've taken that into account and I'm going to cut back on the complaining (sounds stupid, yes, but at least the effort is there). Also, to just "fuck every guy I see" would therefore make me a whore. And I would rather be known as a prude or the like instead of a whore.

I don't think that I'm better than everyone. If you would have noticed, in the thread to nicejohnson I stated that I had talked to her before, and it wasn't just about some pm that she sent me and me "not knowing about it" or whatever. Also, she and I have worked it out and we're on speaking terms, and POSSIBLY working towards being friends. Which is MORE than I can say about you and I.

And I don't think that everyone likes me, either. Apparently I've got quite a few haters out there, and I really don't care. People can like me for me or they can hate me for me. Big deal. The fact of the matter is, I know who I am. Which brings me to this point, who are you, dcom? Do you know who you are? Do you know what characteristics make up everythign that makes you you? Or are you just as confused and unsure as when I first started talking to you. That's what I thought.

Regardless, yeah, I am still new here. But I don't classify myself as a n00b. I've made some friends here that I wouldn't give up for the world, and I'm glad. I know that I can turn to them when I need to, and they know that they can turn to me.

The only thing that got me in your whole entire spiel there, was the fact that you ended it with dissing my music. I have a broad taste of music, and so for you to pick on one genre doesn't really mean much to me. But you don't hear me dissing the stuff that you listen to.

Post #124991

link

MikeyG February 20, 2004 9:47 AM	I for one would like to know who/what dcom is. He's gay, he's not gay, he loves girls, he doesn't love girls. Who the hell are you, dcomposed/Denyer?
Post #125010	link

Beaz February 20, 2004 11:20 AM	Mean Gene Okerlund: It looks like dcom was going for a powerbomb... Lawler: No! Kitty just reversed the move into a frankensteiner! Dcom is on the mat! Kitty goes heads to the top turnbuckle... Gene: Giant Frogsplash! Kitty goes for the pin! Ref: 1..... 2..... Gene: Dcom kicks out! What's he gonna do next King?! Lawler: I don't know! I'm so excited I wet my pants!
Post #125020	link

Zaster February 20, 2004 11:24 AM	Notice how Little Kitty can offer no defense against my devestating line of argument, and attempts to divert attention from the fact by launching vicious and unwarranted attacks on Dcom.
Post #125021	link

xxausrottenxx February 20, 2004 12:28 PM	dcom is a gay guy that only likes girls
Post #125029	link

little_kitty February 20, 2004 12:48 PM	quote: Notice how Little Kitty can offer no defense against my devestating line of argument, and attempts to divert attention from the fact by launching vicious and unwarranted attacks on Dcom. You were right. I had no rebuttal to your first remarks... I knew I could never make it in the line of debate. runs off crying
Post #125032	link

Zaster February 20, 2004 2:08 PM	quote: runs off crying Well now I feel like a real asshole... My victory celebration starts at 8:00 PM. There'll be cotton candy and fireworks.
Post #125039	link

Matchbook_Romance February 20, 2004 2:31 PM	Cotton fireworks?! I'm in!
Post #125042	link

Shadow_Artist February 20, 2004 2:40 PM	quote: Well now I feel like a real asshole... You wouldn't believe how many times I also crave a real asshole. Err, what I mean to say is, FIREWORKS! BOOM! FLASH!
Post #125046	link

dcomposed
February 20, 2004 6:34 PM

quote:
When I started this thread, I wanted something that would challenge my mind, like a different perspective on religion or whatever, not a personal attack against me.

Well, you said "Someone make me think.". I don't think even I can do that, so I went for the next best thing.

quote:
Also, she and I have worked it out and we're on speaking terms, and POSSIBLY working towards being friends. Which is MORE than I can say about you and I.

[sarcasm]Oh no! How can I go on knowing we'll never be friends?[/sarcasm]

quote:
And I don't think that everyone likes me, either. Apparently I've got quite a few haters out there, and I really don't care.

If wanting to leave stripcreator whenever anyone leaves a bad comment or rates you bad is not caring...

quote:
Which brings me to this point, who are you, dcom? Do you know who you are? Do you know what characteristics make up everythign that makes you you? Or are you just as confused and unsure as when I first started talking to you.

I am even more confused and unsure than when you first started talking to me. A lot of it has to do with you, too.

quote:
That's what I thought.

Did you actually wait for me to not answer?

quote:
But you don't hear me dissing the stuff that you listen to.

That's because it's so good. :P I actually wouldn't care, I listen to some really dumb stuff. But it means something to me, and something more than "$$ (comical cha-ching cash register sound)" to the people who make it.

Post #125059

link

dcomposed February 20, 2004 6:37 PM	quote: I for one would like to know who/what dcom is. He's gay, he's not gay, he loves girls, he doesn't love girls. Who the hell are you, dcomposed/Denyer? Please tell me.
Post #125060	link

Zaster
February 21, 2004 5:08 AM

Hey Kitty, I just want to make clear (in case there's any doubt) that every retarded thing I've said has been for the sake of screwing around, and not trying to be a dick. Sometimes I'm not sure where to draw the line. And also sometimes I post drunk.

But Dcom, he's out for blood. Whoah, easy there big fella! It's like a tornado just tore through the warehouse district and busted open a truckload of razor blades. Da-yum! (Sorry, more screwing around.)

Seriously, if you want a friendly debate, I'll try to oblige. I'm not very smart or knowledgable, but I do have a pocket thesaurus, so I can probably fake it for a while.

Post #125122

link

little_kitty February 21, 2004 10:20 AM	Zaster, haha. I'm definitely in for any debate that you can use your pocket thesaurus for. You should join Beaz and I in our quest to have a broader vocabulary. (Pm me for more details... I don't care about announcing my nerdiness, but Beaz might). Also, dcom, in the words of Alicia Silverstone via Clueless *Whatever*
Post #125132	link

attitudechicka February 21, 2004 11:34 AM	quote: Also, dcom, in the words of Alicia Silverstone via Clueless *Whatever* That would be immortal words of Alicia Silverstone.
Post #125135	link

dcomposed February 22, 2004 12:09 AM	quote: *Whatever* (That's not how fights work.)
Post #125228	link

EvilZak February 22, 2004 3:34 AM	It is here.
Post #125231	link

Denyer February 22, 2004 3:47 AM	/comics/Denyer/207296/
Post #125232	link

jes_lawson
March 4, 2004 2:58 PM

I'm resurrecting this thread in the name of Nietsche and Locke.

"The perfect economic system will recognise and effectivly limit the selfish nature of Man. Communism in the USSR was flawed because it failed to account for the individual's drive for personal gain, and the corruptability of those implementing the theory behind the reality. Capitalism in the USA succeeds because it purports the illusion of individual will and gain, while recognising greed, and thus, if not eliminating it, reducing its effects more than communism could hope to, by acknowledging it."

Post #126637

link

little_kitty
March 4, 2004 3:16 PM

quote:
Communism in the USSR was flawed because it failed to account for the individual's drive for personal gain, and the corruptability of those implementing the theory behind the reality.

I see this point and raise you another one. If you look into communism, where it was implemented into the various countries, you will see a fad in the leaders who put communism into said countries. They changed the ideals, even just by a little bit, to make their own way of it. This, to me, is why it never worked. If one were to keep communism's set guidelines (I guess that's the only word to really use there) as Karl Marx had written, I think that it would work, because it would be the equality of everyone which is what most people want, isn't it? Aside from the extremely competitive... but they can just move to a different place if they don't want in.

My roommate in college and I had a big debate about communism, which led to me saying that I was going to become a communist just to prove her wrong and her saying that she was going to stab me in my sleep. Neither of which came true, but it was a great debate.

Post #126640

link

jes_lawson
March 4, 2004 3:44 PM

quote:
quote:
Communism in the USSR was flawed because it failed to account for the individual's drive for personal gain, and the corruptability of those implementing the theory behind the reality.

I see this point and raise you another one. If you look into communism, where it was implemented into the various countries, you will see a fad in the leaders who put communism into said countries. They changed the ideals, even just by a little bit, to make their own way of it. This, to me, is why it never worked. If one were to keep communism's set guidelines (I guess that's the only word to really use there) as Karl Marx had written, I think that it would work, because it would be the equality of everyone which is what most people want, isn't it? Aside from the extremely competitive... but they can just move to a different place if they don't want in.

Yes. It would have been good if Stalin and Trotsky could have settled their differences and ruled the USSR as part of a Committee. But radical political ideas tend to attract radical thinkers, who don't tend to work well in teams, and who have a habit of ice-picking their opponents to death.

Also, the extremely competetive became part of the Underground and Black Market in Russia. Now they are part of the oligarchies and organised crime syndicates. The same people exist in the West - they are the insider dealers, scamers, spammers and drug lords. Wherever there exists a profit, an advantage, a competetive edge, someone, somehwere will do what it takes to seek it out, no matter how depraved/ingenious. It's a sad fact that the most competetive, not the most able, gain power, because they seek it, because they're made that way. This is Genetics.

On the point of criminals or if you prefer, people who disagree with Society, unless you physically hunt down these unscrupulous bastards, or, even better, if you really want rid of them, make it unprofitable for them to live in the country, you won't be rid of them. And, in order to do this, you need to take some pretty drastic action. Which leads us back to Point A: Crazy dictators running the Communist Countries and doing crazy things.

quote:
My roommate in college and I had a big debate about communism, which led to me saying that I was going to become a communist just to prove her wrong and her saying that she was going to stab me in my sleep. Neither of which came true, but it was a great debate.

You should have thought one step ahead: Pretend to agree with her and later stab her in the leg with a poisoned umbrella.

In summary, my point isn't political, it's more scientific - the best system of governance must recognise our nature better, and not some theoretical ideals laid down by some English guy from the 18th century, or some German guy from the 19th/20th.

Post #126641

link

little_kitty
March 5, 2004 1:38 PM

quote:

Yes. It would have been good if Stalin and Trotsky could have settled their differences and ruled the USSR as part of a Committee. But radical political ideas tend to attract radical thinkers, who don't tend to work well in teams, and who have a habit of ice-picking their opponents to death.

I don't know if this ties into what you said at all, but during the summer a friend and I had a conversation with her mom about democracy versus anarchy. There are many people out there right now who are all anti-democracy or claiming that true democracy doesn't exist. So, bring on the anarchy. BUT... No matter what, there's going to be a need for some sort of order. Which means that there will be some sort of leader involved to bring forth such order. Which would therefore lead to some sort of... hmm... dictatorship perhaps? It may start small without people really noticing, but then it might turn out to be something completely horrible like Stalin and Hitler and blah blah blah. I'm probably going to be a hypocrite when I say this, but I don't really care because I have ten billion thoughts running through my mind and I'm finally able to catch hold of a few, But this is sort of what communism is. Its thriving to reach a unified goal, with the hope of little help from someone to run it. I think what happened was these leaders like Stalin let their power go to their head, so instead of bettering Russia (or whatever the hell it was called then... USSR I think), they ended up bettering themself. Themselves. Bah, you get the idea. I do think that communism could work, if the person whom the rest of the country/state/province/whatever agree to have as their leader is willing to get down in the dirt and help them as well. Its all a matter of what this person really wants for the (repeat above options).

quote:
Also, the extremely competetive became part of the Underground and Black Market in Russia. Now they are part of the oligarchies and organised crime syndicates. The same people exist in the West - they are the insider dealers, scamers, spammers and drug lords. Wherever there exists a profit, an advantage, a competetive edge, someone, somehwere will do what it takes to seek it out, no matter how depraved/ingenious. It's a sad fact that the most competetive, not the most able, gain power, because they seek it, because they're made that way. This is Genetics.

I would agree with you on that one. The fact that people are mostly born with this competitive nature to one up their neighbour is a bit of downfall in society. I can bitch about how I wish that things didn't cost so much and blah blah blah, but then I go out and buy the name brand clothing, or the more expensive shampoo because it "works better". I guess the fact of the matter is, there wouldn't be much of an economy without said competitive nature, but how would things be then? Would everything be easier because we wouldn't have this urge to make so much money or to do so much to better ourselves above our fellow human being? Or would everythign just erupt into chaos and we'd all be burned at the stake for being stupid?

quote:
On the point of criminals or if you prefer, people who disagree with Society, unless you physically hunt down these unscrupulous bastards, or, even better, if you really want rid of them, make it unprofitable for them to live in the country, you won't be rid of them. And, in order to do this, you need to take some pretty drastic action. Which leads us back to Point A: Crazy dictators running the Communist Countries and doing crazy things.

You got me there. No matter what, not everyone's going to be happy. people are going to want to rebel. Sometimes I think that people rebel because they're bored. I know I do. I've rebelled against showering. Wasn't a great rebellion... not too many people wanted to join my army.

(ps I am SOOO kidding about that showering thing. Honestly!)

quote:
In summary, my point isn't political, it's more scientific - the best system of governance must recognise our nature better, and not some theoretical ideals laid down by some English guy from the 18th century, or some German guy from the 19th/20th.

But, the fact of the matter is, no matter what we think the country/state/blah blah blah needs, the government isn't going to see it that way. They see what they see. Its their eyes that our countries are ruled out of. And they don't always catch what we want them to see. Also, I agree. Maybe rules made by a guy who lived ages ago aren't the best ones to follow. But its worth a try, isn't it?

I haven't thought this much since college. My brain is now protesting.

Post #126758

link

jes_lawson
March 12, 2004 3:48 PM

OK, so I was detouring from your point about communism and getting into genetics and stuff. Back to politics:

I liked what you said about anarchy, kitty.

In its most benign form, anarchy is the ultimate form of rule - no government. Again, this allows ultimate freedom, but relies too much on people wanting to co-operate. Anarchy is often misinterpreted as "anti-government" and most "anarchists" you'll see on TV are violent wankers who have a grudge against authority. Rather, it's an alternative to government.

It only works in small groups (eg. Alex Garland's "The Beach" illustrated a benign anarchy) or where communications and/or distance make centralised government impossible - my favourite sci-fi author, Iain M. Banks, makes great use of this in his novels where he argues that in space, over huge distances, central government is impossible, so people should just do whatever the hell they want without any form of centralised government, behaviour being dictated by local social norms. But, of course, in his books, all the people have super-intelligent spaceships to look after them, and are so advanced that they want for virtually nothing and spend all day shagging each other and getting high...

I ought to look up some papers on benign anarchy.

As far as communism goes, I just don't think it can work on a large scale. If I have time I'll have a look as to why communism has survived in Cuba when it got so massively rejected in Russia and Eastern Europe.

It can work on a small scale, or in a diluted form (our aikido club is run very much on socialist principles, not that we sing Red Flag or anything daft like that, but we all pay the same for accomodation, food and beer when we go on holiday at Easter, and everyone gets equal treatment - and it works out cheaper somehow when we all club together)

You're right when you say that the government doesn't always listen to what we say. No form of government is perfect.

I'm glad your brain is hurting - I've got the urge to do some background reading on anarchism and communism now. This kind of stuff *is* exciting. Hell - I bet I would have got a much better class of degree if I had had this kind of serious level of discussion on my subject. Maybe when I've not spent 12 hours at an airport waiting for a non-existant flight, I'll come back with some source material and references for you.

PS - I haven't had a shower in 3 months, but only because I only have a bath in the flat ;-)

Post #127572

link

DMSO March 14, 2004 10:54 AM	If you're interested in discussions of Anarchy as a feasible form of government, Ursula LeGuin's "The Dispossessed" is something you should read.
Post #127876	link

kaufman March 14, 2004 8:37 PM	quote: If you're interested in discussions of Anarchy as a feasible form of government, Ursula LeGuin's "The Dispossessed" is something you should read. What that book describes that calls itself anarchy, but it seems to me more like an idealized version of communism than any true anarchy.
Post #127934	link

MikeyG March 17, 2004 11:49 AM	The Disposessed is actually about the practical use of communism in modern government. It is based in communism, not anarchy. Give kaufman his props for pointing that out.
Post #128353	link

jes_lawson March 18, 2004 3:46 AM	Hey, is kitty coming back to this thread, or is she all fighted out?
Post #128463	link

little_kitty
March 18, 2004 6:59 AM

Sorry, jes... Gathering thoughts, buying stuff, pretending to not have any money left so I don't pay my aunt... etc, etc.

Anyway, I was just thinking back to my English Lit class in Uni (one that I actually continually went to!!) We read Thomas More's Utopia, which is, basically, the absence of a true government. One could say that an anarchaic (I don't think that's a word, but hey, it works) society is the same as a Utopian society, could they not? Which, therefore, could go to say that a communist society (we're looking at fundamentals here...) also equals Utopian society.

Where am I going with this? I can't really remember anymore. But, ... Okay, no, the thought is gone.

Jes, that is a good question though, why communism worked in Cuba but went ass-up in Europe. I'd like to come up with something for that, but I'm too excited for other stuff right now to think properly. Give me a day or so and I'll come up with something, I promise.

Anyway, like I said before, I'm just happy that I sparked an interest in looking up stuff. I actually went on my own and looked up stuff on communism... Got the 10 "basic" ideals of it... And maybe I'm not all for commie's like I used to be. Its fucked up.

Post #128471

link

Forum archives » Fights Go Here » Boredom takes fight....