Conquer Club

The question says it all.

It's election season.
Does Mexico even have elections? I've been too busy with FREEDOM and LIBERTY and HOLLYWOOD-STYLE SEX to look into it.

Juan_Bottom wrote:It's election season.
Does Mexico even have elections? I've been too busy with FREEDOM and LIBERTY and HOLLYWOOD-STYLE SEX to look into it.

And Cody.

nietzsche wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:It's election season.
Does Mexico even have elections? I've been too busy with FREEDOM and LIBERTY and HOLLYWOOD-STYLE SEX to look into it.

AndWith Cody.

zoinks

I would oppose only because I would have to redirect to another forum when I could just stay on this one. Anyway, the political threads have a nice way of burying the more drivel-laden threads.

You don't have to participate in any thread you dislike. But, who is to say what is politics and what isn't? A lot of thread start out on one topic and migrate to another. Given that its an election year, and a lot of people here do live in the US, its natural that US politics is a major focus.

You are always welcome to start your own topics and request "no US politics" in the discussion. (good luck on that working, though...)

Funkyterrance wrote:I would oppose only because I would have to redirect to another forum when I could just stay on this one.

PLAYER57832 wrote:You don't have to participate in any thread you dislike. But, who is to say what is politics and what isn't? A lot of thread start out on one topic and migrate to another.

Given that its an election year, and a lot of people here do live in the US, its natural that US politics is a major focus.

You are always welcome to start your own topics and request "no US politics" in the discussion. (good luck on that working, though...)

Anyway, the political threads have a nice way of burying the more drivel-laden threads.[/quote]
Yeah.

I don't support the idea because it's one more thing the mods would have to monitor that has nothing at all to do with the game or behaviors on the site.

stahrgazer wrote:I don't support the idea because it's one more thing the mods would have to monitor that has nothing at all to do with the game or behaviors on the site.

These forums are monitored by discussions moderators, who apply to become moderators because of the discussion in these forums.

Funny how some would oppose to it only because they don't want to see the change, not necessarily because it would be a bad thing.

Pretty much like PS opposes to gay marriage only because "minorities shouldn't dictate politics".

The change could be good, and I don't see a reason for it to be a bad thing. But "hey, I like politics, I don't believe in the rights of those who don't, let's oppose to it".

The question isn't even "do you support the creation of a special subforum for US politics", it's would you oppose, which requires anything from your support, only not to oppose to it.

I voted yes because of the wording of the question. The question would be whether the majority is for the creation of the said subforum, not whether they're not opposed to it.

I voted no because I haven't got mitt for brains

nietzsche wrote:Funny how some would oppose to it only because they don't want to see the change, not necessarily because it would be a bad thing.

Pretty much like PS opposes to gay marriage only because "minorities shouldn't dictate politics".

The change could be good, and I don't see a reason for it to be a bad thing. But "hey, I like politics, I don't believe in the rights of those who don't, let's oppose to it".

The question isn't even "do you support the creation of a special subforum for US politics", it's would you oppose, which requires anything from your support, only not to oppose to it.

The biggest problem is who would decide what is politics.

This has been discussed many times before --- politics, religion, etc have all been suggested as possible subforums. But, discussions here tend to swing the gamut and don't necessarily stick to one topic.

If you don't wish to participate in a particular thread, just don't. I could really care less about football, (sports in general, except the Olympics), however, I would never tell people not to make them or that they are getting in the way of other threads. Besides, its possible I might get into what is ostentiably a sports thread at some point. (not dismissing the possibility, though I have no idea why I would do that).

Do you feel that Mexicans are too pushy?

Vartiovuori wrote:I voted yes because of the wording of the question. The question would be whether the majority is for the creation of the said subforum, not whether they're not opposed to it.

Are you saying you got confused and voted for the wrong option or that you didn't like the wording and decided to punish the motion by voting against it?


I consciously composed the question that way. It was not a mistake.

BigBallinStalin wrote:Do you feel that Mexicans are too pushy?

If by pushy you mean smart and handsome then yes.

I oppose everything to do with politics. Therefore, I oppose a separate sub-forum.

Liberty for all, and freedom to slander the right.

nietzsche wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:Do you feel that Mexicans are too pushy?

If by pushy you mean smart and handsome then yes.

Bleh, the more posts I see like this the more I believe that nietzsche is truly one butt ugly individual. I'm picturing Ross Perot caliber. Also, why the lowercase "n" in your name? If you're not a proper noun, you don't matter m8. Or is this a Freudian slip?
You word the title in a way that subconsciously makes one lean towards voting against a subforum and then you get irritated when people on the fence are leaning in that direction? Have you ever heard of a self-fulfilled prophecy?

Funkyterrance wrote:

nietzsche wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:Do you feel that Mexicans are too pushy?

If by pushy you mean smart and handsome then yes.

Bleh, the more posts I see like this the more I believe that nietzsche is truly one butt ugly individual. I'm picturing Ross Perot caliber. Also, why the lowercase "n" in your name? If you're not a proper noun, you don't matter m8. Or is this a Freudian slip?
You word the title in a way that subconsciously makes one lean towards voting against a subforum and then you get irritated when people on the fence are leaning in that direction? Have you ever heard of a self-fulfilled prophecy?

Actually, I worded it in such a way that people who can read above 3rd grade would be more likely to vote in favor of the subforum.

And I'm not ugly, we can share pics, but via pm because I only have nude pics.

nietzsche wrote:And I'm not ugly, we can share pics, but via pm because I only have nude pics.

IT'S WORTH IT, GUYS - TRUST ME. SERIOUSLY.

I would oppose the politics subforum, simply because it would wipe out Wild Things

nietzsche wrote:
Actually, I worded it in such a way that people who can read above 3rd grade would be more likely to vote in favor of the subforum.

And I'm not ugly, we can share pics, but via pm because I only have nude pics.

Ross Perot in the nude, hmmm. I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I think I'll pass. You do realize there is no way to prove what you look like either way so it's really a moot point and my suspicions against your word (which holds very little weight imho)? I have to say the pictures of girls all over your sig suggest that even if you are not entirely butt ugly, you don't have much luck with the ladies.
As far as your title goes, I'll submit to the fact that it's debatable but ultimately a matter of semantics. I'm not even going to throw a childish insult over it either. I see it as a sign of weakness.

Funkyterrance wrote:

nietzsche wrote:
Actually, I worded it in such a way that people who can read above 3rd grade would be more likely to vote in favor of the subforum.

And I'm not ugly, we can share pics, but via pm because I only have nude pics.

Ross Perot in the nude, hmmm. I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I think I'll pass. You do realize there is no way to prove what you look like either way so it's really a moot point and my suspicions against your word (which holds very little weight imho)? I have to say the pictures of girls all over your sig suggest that even if you are not entirely butt ugly, you don't have much luck with the ladies.
As far as your title goes, I'll submit to the fact that it's debatable but ultimately a matter of semantics. I'm not even going to throw a childish insult over it either. I see it as a sign of weakness.

I find pictures of pretty girls to be pleasant to my eye. I think they are pleasant to every guy's eye with good taste. But to be honest with you, I'm very rude on 1vs1 games most of the time, and the pictures help to not get reported lol.

But what if I was ugly? I don't see the problem with that. We all get physically ugly eventually.

I'm lucky with the ladies whenever I've wanted, that said I don't like having gfs for long time, I find the activities of being in a relationship very boring. Since I was 17 I could recognize that being with a girl modified my thought pattern from a very unique and amusing (to me) to a very dull, content person, worrying only about what I would have to wear to the next social event. I hope my honesty shows to you that I'm not lying about anything.

Crap, why am I even bothering lol, I guess I'm human, all too human.

nietzsche wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:

nietzsche wrote:
Actually, I worded it in such a way that people who can read above 3rd grade would be more likely to vote in favor of the subforum.

And I'm not ugly, we can share pics, but via pm because I only have nude pics.

Ross Perot in the nude, hmmm. I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I think I'll pass. You do realize there is no way to prove what you look like either way so it's really a moot point and my suspicions against your word (which holds very little weight imho)? I have to say the pictures of girls all over your sig suggest that even if you are not entirely butt ugly, you don't have much luck with the ladies.
As far as your title goes, I'll submit to the fact that it's debatable but ultimately a matter of semantics. I'm not even going to throw a childish insult over it either. I see it as a sign of weakness.

I find pictures of pretty girls to be pleasant to my eye. I think they are pleasant to every guy's eye with good taste. But to be honest with you, I'm very rude on 1vs1 games most of the time, and the pictures help to not get reported lol.

But what if I was ugly? I don't see the problem with that. We all get physically ugly eventually.

I'm lucky with the ladies whenever I've wanted, that said I don't like having gfs for long time, I find the activities of being in a relationship very boring. Since I was 17 I could recognize that being with a girl modified my thought pattern from a very unique and amusing (to me) to a very dull, content person, worrying only about what I would have to wear to the next social event. I hope my honesty shows to you that I'm not lying about anything.

Crap, why am I even bothering lol, I guess I'm human, all too human.

SHUT UP, pose and email.

nietzsche wrote:
But what if I was ugly? I don't see the problem with that.

This is exactly my point! What you look like, ugly or not, has absolutely nothing to do with the interwebs whatever. However, the fact that you brought it up on the interwebs makes you now fair game. Them's the rules, m8.
Look, buddy, I'm truly not trying to hurt your feelings or anything but lets just stick with the facts ok? If you can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt it just doesn't hold up on here.