Upload
Login or register

RandomAnonGuy

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Age: 26
Date Signed Up:3/14/2010
Last Login:5/31/2014
Location:Australia
Stats
Content Thumbs: 2 total,  9 ,  11
Comment Thumbs: 5251 total,  7549 ,  2298
Content Level Progress: 3.38% (2/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 20% (20/100)
Level 252 Comments: Contaminated Win → Level 253 Comments: Contaminated Win
Subscribers:3
Content Views:910
Total Comments Made:4278
FJ Points:5444

latest user's comments

#27 - Yes it is. When designing characters for a story, as you do in…  [+] (6 replies) 02/02/2014 on whiye power !! 0
User avatar
#30 - captainfuckitall (02/02/2014) [-]
Well, what if the majority of the people who read it are white?
User avatar
#38 - harryboom (02/02/2014) [-]
then you could expand into secondary demographic with very little effort
User avatar
#59 - captainfuckitall (02/02/2014) [-]
And then you get harassed for having 'token minorities'.
User avatar
#60 - harryboom (02/02/2014) [-]
well you do have a token minority, that's the whole point. but you're going to get more new customers than you would lose for having a token minority
User avatar
#62 - captainfuckitall (02/02/2014) [-]
I doubt that. I would never sit down and watch a program just because a white person is in it, but I can imagine certainly being offended if they put one if just to pander to me. And that's just counting a person of their own race, you have no idea how SJW or what-not would react.
User avatar
#63 - harryboom (02/02/2014) [-]
but people are more likely to watch things if there is someone they can relate to in it. it's shown time and time again by marketing and psychology. when DC introduced simon baz as green lantern that comic had a massive boost in sales. people in marketing don't fuck around when it comes to money they focus test this shit more than politicians
#16 - Haha what? Pirates were vicious and greedy. They were rapists,…  [+] (2 replies) 02/02/2014 on Pirates and gangsters. +1
#21 - restfullwicked (02/02/2014) [-]
did you know that european governments had pirate crews in their navy? they werent called murderers then. more to the point, to the spanish Francis Drake was one of the most bloodthirsty pirates that has ever lived, but he was a nobelman in the british court, and by all accounts was actually a good man. Pirates that work for a government are called corsairs, the difference being that they only raid ships that their country is at war with. its all a matter of perspective.
#32 - marikthegunslinger (02/02/2014) [-]
And I don't see any government, no matter how corrupt, hiring a bunch of stupid, egotistical gangsters for any reason.
#78 - Potential happiness of one person against potential misery of two.  [+] (1 reply) 02/02/2014 on Some generic title 0
User avatar
#80 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
Like I have said at least three times in this thread. Neither of us are going to change the others opinion. This has been a total waste of time. And it is the potential happiness of three against the potential misery of two. I have also said newborns are pretty likely to be adopted. Yes the process is lengthy, but it does get done. And I was more talking about the potential to have desire and conscious thought in this case, since you were talking about how apathetic the undeveloped baby is. Every time you sleep you no longer care about what is going on around you until the point that you wake up. Should we take the choice as to whether you will wake up away. Whenever people are at the end of their life, it is always, if possible decided what to do with them based off of what people think the person would want, even if it the person isn't likely to wake up again and cannot care any longer. You still decide based off of what they might want. Why take that away from a baby because it doesn't care yet?
#76 - Man, if you love a kid even a little bit never put it up for a…  [+] (3 replies) 02/02/2014 on Some generic title 0
User avatar
#77 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
And we are back to potential.
User avatar
#78 - RandomAnonGuy (02/02/2014) [-]
Potential happiness of one person against potential misery of two.
User avatar
#80 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
Like I have said at least three times in this thread. Neither of us are going to change the others opinion. This has been a total waste of time. And it is the potential happiness of three against the potential misery of two. I have also said newborns are pretty likely to be adopted. Yes the process is lengthy, but it does get done. And I was more talking about the potential to have desire and conscious thought in this case, since you were talking about how apathetic the undeveloped baby is. Every time you sleep you no longer care about what is going on around you until the point that you wake up. Should we take the choice as to whether you will wake up away. Whenever people are at the end of their life, it is always, if possible decided what to do with them based off of what people think the person would want, even if it the person isn't likely to wake up again and cannot care any longer. You still decide based off of what they might want. Why take that away from a baby because it doesn't care yet?
#73 - I didn't do any proper debate stuff in school or anything, I d…  [+] (5 replies) 02/02/2014 on Some generic title 0
User avatar
#75 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
The problem isn't the weight of the potential, with me. We can argue that all day, and it won't matter. My problem is that the potential is taken away. If given a choice right now, would you prefer to die or live a life with a chance of reaching happiness. Doesn't have to be a great chance. Just a chance. You are making that decision for a human being that is unable to at this point. People always tend to ignore the adoption route too, which is a pretty easy thing to do with newborns, so I have heard. Then the want of the mother to the child has little to do with its quality of life. Their aren't very many good arguments against adoption over abortion that don't involve a mother who is at risk for having the child, which is something I believe we have covered in this little conversation. The only other situation is rape, and I am 50/50 as to whether abortion after rape should be allowed. I'll make that decision eventually.
User avatar
#76 - RandomAnonGuy (02/02/2014) [-]
Man, if you love a kid even a little bit never put it up for adoption. The system is so convoluted, congested and broken as it is. You can't just go up and adopt a kid anytime you want, it's a lengthy process. Which'd be good for the kids if there weren't so many of them.
And I'd like a chance, but a fetus wouldn't like anything. It literally does not care. There is no creature more apathetic than an undeveloped baby.
User avatar
#77 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
And we are back to potential.
User avatar
#78 - RandomAnonGuy (02/02/2014) [-]
Potential happiness of one person against potential misery of two.
User avatar
#80 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
Like I have said at least three times in this thread. Neither of us are going to change the others opinion. This has been a total waste of time. And it is the potential happiness of three against the potential misery of two. I have also said newborns are pretty likely to be adopted. Yes the process is lengthy, but it does get done. And I was more talking about the potential to have desire and conscious thought in this case, since you were talking about how apathetic the undeveloped baby is. Every time you sleep you no longer care about what is going on around you until the point that you wake up. Should we take the choice as to whether you will wake up away. Whenever people are at the end of their life, it is always, if possible decided what to do with them based off of what people think the person would want, even if it the person isn't likely to wake up again and cannot care any longer. You still decide based off of what they might want. Why take that away from a baby because it doesn't care yet?
#66 - But there's more to be taken into account than just that. If a…  [+] (8 replies) 02/02/2014 on Some generic title 0
User avatar
#69 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
Like I said, I have taken part in more than one of these debates. In real life too, with research and everything. In almost every one of them, I have been forced to be the one for abortion, despite the fact that I disagree with it. We didn't really have many in the classes that were for abortion, and those people were never the people I faced, so naturally, they thought I would be best able to handle a viewpoint that I disagree with. In fact, I am pretty sure I have a saved page full of research statistics talking about what you just said. I have even won a few of those debates, so you know I wasn't slacking on my arguments. I still disagree with the points though. That same potential to have a bad life is also the potential to have a good life, and you are taking that chance away.
User avatar
#71 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
To be a bit more specific, when I say "saved page" i mean more like about 10 pages.
User avatar
#73 - RandomAnonGuy (02/02/2014) [-]
I didn't do any proper debate stuff in school or anything, I don't really like the structure of formal debate. I much rather a conversational style of things. That said, I've looked up a bunch of stuff before and the potenetial isn't the same. A wanted child with financially stable parents is significantly more likely to have a happy early life than an unwanted child.
User avatar
#75 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
The problem isn't the weight of the potential, with me. We can argue that all day, and it won't matter. My problem is that the potential is taken away. If given a choice right now, would you prefer to die or live a life with a chance of reaching happiness. Doesn't have to be a great chance. Just a chance. You are making that decision for a human being that is unable to at this point. People always tend to ignore the adoption route too, which is a pretty easy thing to do with newborns, so I have heard. Then the want of the mother to the child has little to do with its quality of life. Their aren't very many good arguments against adoption over abortion that don't involve a mother who is at risk for having the child, which is something I believe we have covered in this little conversation. The only other situation is rape, and I am 50/50 as to whether abortion after rape should be allowed. I'll make that decision eventually.
User avatar
#76 - RandomAnonGuy (02/02/2014) [-]
Man, if you love a kid even a little bit never put it up for adoption. The system is so convoluted, congested and broken as it is. You can't just go up and adopt a kid anytime you want, it's a lengthy process. Which'd be good for the kids if there weren't so many of them.
And I'd like a chance, but a fetus wouldn't like anything. It literally does not care. There is no creature more apathetic than an undeveloped baby.
User avatar
#77 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
And we are back to potential.
User avatar
#78 - RandomAnonGuy (02/02/2014) [-]
Potential happiness of one person against potential misery of two.
User avatar
#80 - mylazy (02/02/2014) [-]
Like I have said at least three times in this thread. Neither of us are going to change the others opinion. This has been a total waste of time. And it is the potential happiness of three against the potential misery of two. I have also said newborns are pretty likely to be adopted. Yes the process is lengthy, but it does get done. And I was more talking about the potential to have desire and conscious thought in this case, since you were talking about how apathetic the undeveloped baby is. Every time you sleep you no longer care about what is going on around you until the point that you wake up. Should we take the choice as to whether you will wake up away. Whenever people are at the end of their life, it is always, if possible decided what to do with them based off of what people think the person would want, even if it the person isn't likely to wake up again and cannot care any longer. You still decide based off of what they might want. Why take that away from a baby because it doesn't care yet?