Click to expand


Last status update:
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:3/15/2010
Last Login:7/23/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#7490
Highest Content Rank:#4947
Highest Comment Rank:#1541
Content Thumbs: 676 total,  963 ,  287
Comment Thumbs: 6812 total,  8798 ,  1986
Content Level Progress: 30% (3/10)
Level 66 Content: FJ Cultist → Level 67 Content: FJ Cultist
Comment Level Progress: 65% (65/100)
Level 262 Comments: Pure Win → Level 263 Comments: Pure Win
Content Views:34492
Times Content Favorited:37 times
Total Comments Made:2070
FJ Points:3194
Favorite Tags: giggity (24) | funny (4) | sexy (4) | win (4) | epic (3) | giggty (3) | i (3) | Babies (2) | black (2) | derp (2) | dolan (2) | oh yeah (2) | pig (2) | the (2) | troll (2)

latest user's comments

#14 - how are you not embarrassed about being so riled by "unet…  [+] (2 new replies) 10/31/2014 on Anti Gamergaters -1
#35 - anon (11/02/2014) [-]
Listen up faggot, if you take joy from something an you are not a gray blob of nothing, then imagine your hobby, point of intrest or whatever being shat at. And about the whole thing with "you should fight corruption in other things", shitlord, you go do that. We pick our own fights, you fucking prick.
#18 - anon (10/31/2014) [-]
I'm against corruption in general, but sometimes we need to take baby steps. That's just how it is.

Not to mention, at this point, gaming is basically all I have left. When they're trying to push their agenda into THIS, TOO, what else will I have?
#17 - the ******* russian dota thing got me so bad 10/31/2014 on Steam reviews comp pt. 3 +20
#67 - I think the real point of the video is lost on a lot of people here  [+] (2 new replies) 10/31/2014 on PATRIARCHY!!! +10
User avatar #70 - lip (10/31/2014) [-]
Was the real point that the video said they filmed 100's of cases of street harassment but didn't show any white guys?

Cuz that's what I got out of it.
User avatar #75 - yujisakaii (10/31/2014) [-]
100`s of cases if you count something like "have a nice day" or "god bless you"

thats not harassement in any way
#8 - source is a short film by David O'Reilly called The External World 10/29/2014 on Hue +1
#1 - stolen from weird twitter  [+] (3 new replies) 10/29/2014 on lol +3
#6 - anon (10/29/2014) [-]
who cares?
#5 - grandthefthollow (10/29/2014) [-]
Like everything on frontpage isn't stolen.
User avatar #2 - chism (10/29/2014) [-]
or from yik yak...
#49 - year ago, I'm "talking" or whatever with this girl. … 10/28/2014 on that bitch +3
#21 - the sheer amount of replies on that last one made me lol 10/24/2014 on HUGE 4chan comp. Part 8/32 +1
#22 - *at meeting* "hey Ted, a news site we advertise on po… 10/24/2014 on VW and Gawker +2
#73 - I'm getting a debt free degree because I got scholarships …  [+] (2 new replies) 10/14/2014 on Shots fired +7
User avatar #127 - stifflimb (10/15/2014) [-]
Or she's bright and chooses to strip instead so another person who cant pay their studies that way gets the scholarship, see the brighter side and even shit gets brighter!
User avatar #92 - ScottP (10/14/2014) [-]
I don't have many scholarships. Grad school is going to suck.
#234 - damn I hope you enjoy your life full of self-congratulatory bi…  [+] (1 new reply) 10/13/2014 on Be who you want to be +1
User avatar #235 - mrpavelowgrimm (10/14/2014) [-]
I promise I will if you promise to enjoy your life of adoration towards human beings that accomplish nothing besides self-grandeur.

We got a deal?
#72 - 99% of "singers, actors, and entertainers" make the …  [+] (3 new replies) 10/13/2014 on Be who you want to be +15
#123 - mrpavelowgrimm (10/13/2014) [-]
You mean to say there are millions out there who would like to be idolized, have the lives of kings, and be above the law. Just by acting, singing or entertaining. Instead of devoting their lives on a field working towards the betterment of humanity just die in obscurity with just a few people remembering who they were and what they accomplished, like most scientist do?

Holy shit dude! you just blew my mind. I feel so bad for those spoor singers, actors, and entertainers who threw their future away trying to win the modern-aristocracy lottery and are now pretty much the dead weight of humanity.

Its a real tragedy.
User avatar #234 - lazorman (10/13/2014) [-]
damn I hope you enjoy your life full of self-congratulatory bitterness towards human beings who prefer to pursue artistic endeavors instead of science and engineering

really, I do
User avatar #235 - mrpavelowgrimm (10/14/2014) [-]
I promise I will if you promise to enjoy your life of adoration towards human beings that accomplish nothing besides self-grandeur.

We got a deal?
#20 - my childhood tho 10/12/2014 on My life is over +1
#29 - >flu like symptoms I hate to break it to you but you mi… 10/11/2014 on 10 Gallon Hat +4
#32 - I'm glad this is important to you 09/26/2014 on Petition for change +1
#30 - don't tell me what to not shame people for you're sounding…  [+] (2 new replies) 09/26/2014 on Petition for change 0
User avatar #31 - carefree (09/26/2014) [-]
You're within your rights to say whatever you want, sure.
But so am I. So I can tell you that I'm not ashamed to care so much about an issue that is important to me.
I can also tell you that you're wrong, and your opinions are dumb.
#32 - lazorman (09/26/2014) [-]
I'm glad this is important to you
#28 - again don't you guys get embarrassed that THIS is what you…  [+] (12 new replies) 09/26/2014 on Petition for change -18
User avatar #103 - weirdoo (09/27/2014) [-]
Oh boy, I have an entire folder dedicated to this, want me to dump?
#41 - iowndemostest (09/26/2014) [-]
It's more than just unethical journalism practices, it's also about the potential alienation of creative freedom in video games. If anything, I'm amazed that we've been able to make as much of an impact as we have. I'd never be embarrassed about defending my livelihood.
#35 - subejio (09/26/2014) [-]
Like it or not, games journalism dictates what does and does not get made through the direction of purchases. AAA games only get made when they are almost assured to be successes, and when a journal calls a title offensive or ground-breaking, that will impact the success as more gamers are driven away or towards the game, respectively.

When reviews are bought and sold- monetarily, through favors, or through connections- that impacts the whole of the industry and what will and will not get made. The indie market is, to an extent, safer from this than others, and there will always be someone out there who is willing to tell the industry to go fuck itself, but this severely restricts the budget and awareness available, and even they can be ruined or greenlit on the word of an influential magazine or writer.

This, of course, is why Zoe Quinn's alleged actions revolving around her game "Depression Quest" was the spark that lit the powder keg. As to why we're still going on about this, it's because it's still a problem, and how the seeming majority of journalists' have handled this issue has not eased tensions in the slightest.
User avatar #46 - hydraetis (09/26/2014) [-]
Wouldn't things like E3 and Gamespot/IGN have vastly more influence than stupid shit like Kotaku and whatnot? I haven't once gone to Kotaku for information on a game. Whenever I search for reviews/information it's always either popular youtubers, Gamespot/IGN, or just the game's dedicated webpage itself that comes up. I still don't understand how pissy little sites like the ones being argued about can have any sort of recognisable impact.
#79 - fresighto (09/27/2014) [-]
Actually yea. The monolithic sites have been pretty neutral. One writer from game informer actually left the email group in protest. Good on him.
#54 - subejio (09/26/2014) [-]
I applaud you for your choice in gaming news, but to believe that Kotaku, RockPaperShotgun, or Gamasutra have no real influence is incredibly naive. These (among the other big names in journalism at the moment) are the names that many, if not most, think of when they want to read up on gaming news. As such, they hold much power in the industry.

Even those aware of the possibility for skewed facts and want to compare sources will generally compare between multiple known sites, and the big names have a great deal of awareness. Comparing stories is a good habit to be in, of course, but it's useless when the big namers are ALL SAYING THE SAME THING, because they've all been bought (again, monetarily, through favors, through connections, or through bias).

Worse, when the small guys DO break the mold and give a different viewpoint, they have to get over the initial rejection by readers who are less inclined to believe the small guy because they're perceived as less reliable. That is why such a stance is being taken against corruption in games journalism.

I agree that Gamespot/IGN have a great deal of influence on their own, but E3 is a press-only event. The public is not allowed to attend, and can only get their E3 news second-hand, filtered through whatever site they visit. The journalists writing about the games will already be biased toward them, having just gone through a multi-day expo of booth babes, free handouts, and empty promises. It is extremely rare that a NEGATIVE review comes out of E3, and all of this falls back to my points above.
#57 - rollfourexplain (09/26/2014) [-]
**rollfourexplain rolls 8,830**

Actually these people are saying the same thing partly because they all agreed to say the same thing before hand. I was shocked myself. Someone should get this to the front page but I'm not good enough of a poster to do that.


For the anons who can't see links: www (.) breitbart (.) com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/17/Exposed-the-secret-mailing-list-of-the-gaming-jo urnalism-elite
User avatar #29 - carefree (09/26/2014) [-]
No. It's a hobby for some, a passion for others, a career for others still.
People are upset because others are trying to tell them what they enjoy. What they SHOULD enjoy.
The fact that we care about something others see as so minute doesn't change the fact that we're invested in this hobby, passion, career.
And you shouldn't shame people over it.
#36 - fernypoo (09/26/2014) [-]
you're dumb
User avatar #30 - lazorman (09/26/2014) [-]
don't tell me what to not shame people for
you're sounding like one of those sjws you hate so much
I can make fun of whoever I want
User avatar #31 - carefree (09/26/2014) [-]
You're within your rights to say whatever you want, sure.
But so am I. So I can tell you that I'm not ashamed to care so much about an issue that is important to me.
I can also tell you that you're wrong, and your opinions are dumb.
#32 - lazorman (09/26/2014) [-]
I'm glad this is important to you
#148 - I seriously want the pants one 09/26/2014 on I compiled 4chan shirt... +1
#20 - the marines also eat less apples than ever before wow romney d…  [+] (19 new replies) 09/25/2014 on You cheeky cunt -14
#23 - rapathazar (09/25/2014) [-]
Amazing inability to get it. Romney was claiming our military is getting weak because we have the fewest ships we have ever had in our Navy since 1917. Obama countered that we also have fewer Horses and Bayonets in our military than we did in 1917. The parallel being drawn here is that the fact we have fewer ships is not the product of a weaker military, but one that has changed, and thus requires fewer ships in the same way our military is not weaker for having fewer horses or bayonets, but that it has simply evolved beyond the large scale use of either utility.

It was a sick burn because it A.) Effectively countered Romney's attempt at saying Obama was weak. B.) Flipped it on Romney by insinuating his talking point was not only incorrect but derivative of an outdated mentality on warfare. and C.) It was a smooth instant reply that seemed almost hand crafted to discredit Governor Romney's point.
#32 - wyldek (09/25/2014) [-]
I don't think we've evolved beyond the use of having a navy. And if you still need a navy, you should have a strong one. And a strong navy has more ships. Obama's analogy about warfighting technology makes no sense.
#50 - angelusprimus (09/25/2014) [-]
No, we have evolved beyond use of battleships (last decomissioned in 1996) and huge amounts of relatively smaller ships who's main weapons were rifled cannons, like in ww1.
Instead of muskets we have assault rifles, so we no longer need a large battle lines, we have skirmish groups. Instead of horses we have tanks, APCs and helicopters.
Instead of a huge navy filled with small ships each with relatively small amount of power, we have fewer ships each more powerful then entire navies in 1917. Carriers, nuclear submarines and guided missile destroyers changed the nature of naval war, just like better rifles and transportation changed the ground war.
#36 - theruinedsage (09/25/2014) [-]
Cruisers and carriers are much more effective at supporting a land operation than destroyers and battleships, meaning you need far less for the same amount of effectiveness. The US doesn't really need a strong naval fighting force, you need a strong naval supporting force, which you didn't have during ww1, but which you have now.

If you can't understand how the role of a navy has changed during a hundred years of political and technological progress/change, you should probably shut up instead of yapping your mouth.
#35 - bigredthunder (09/25/2014) [-]
Except thats not true at all. Want to know what we didn't have in 1917? Aircraft carriers, you know those huge ass floating runnways? We also didn't have any submarines which is a huge part of our navy now. Times change.
#47 - wyldek (09/25/2014) [-]
That doesn't change the fact that we don't want a small navy. The sizes of the military can be judged many different ways. My guess is that Romney was referring to budget and personnel.

So sure, we don't need as many $7B Aircraft Carriers as we need $3M (1906) Dreadnaughts, but we do still need the ~7000 people to crew each one, and the resources to produce and maintain them. Which you can't do with a "small" navy.

Now, whether we NEED a big military is a different discussion. But that would have nothing to do with technology and everything to do with the political climate.

The point is, when talking about the size of a military branch, technology is irrelevant. Having a big army in the 1800s and having a big army now means different things. That doesn't mean that a small army is better than a big one.
#54 - bigredthunder (09/25/2014) [-]
Wrong again. Today a smaller navy is exactly what we want. We don't need giant battleships anymore because guided missiles obsoleted them. Modern ships have smaller crews because more systems are automated. Guess what technology is the only thing that should be talked about in concern to navy, because today we can handle threats with one sub that would have taken a whole fleet in 1917.
#58 - wyldek (09/25/2014) [-]
Dude, this isn't civ. It's not like we have nuclear subs and they're rocking triremes. Yeah, one of our subs could take a whole 1917 fleet. But guess about how many other modern subs it can take? Im guessing the number is somewhere around 1(±1). Which means if it DOES come to that, yeah, the bigger navy with the most subs will probably win.

And all the funding to develop and install and maintain those automated systems cost money. Money they gave to the navy. Increasing the navy budget and size.

Come on guys, this isn't crazy.
User avatar #67 - bigredthunder (09/25/2014) [-]
First off Romney was explicitly talking about number of ships not funding. Secondly, there has only been 5 naval "battles" since 2000 and during all of those only 3 ships were sunk. Massive naval battles with huge fleets slugging it out is never going to happen again. What we need now is a streamlined quick response navy that can assist ground units more effectively. This means a smaller navy. Fact is we simply don't need a huge ass navy and having one would be horrific waste of money that could be put to better use in other areas.
#71 - wyldek (09/25/2014) [-]
And we know it's never going to happen again how? WW1 was called "The war to end all wars". I'm sure they thought everything was going to be fine after that too. WW2 showed us that all it takes is one charismatic crazy to start a big ass fight. I can think of several crazies in positions of power RIGHT NOW.

And if we're scattered all over the globe like the dumbass world police we're trying to be, we WILL need more ships to support the troops all over the damn planet. Best way to have a quick response is to be in a lot of places at once. Smaller ships maybe, but more of them in strategic places to support troops. We have less warships than countries we have troops in right now.

User avatar #49 - whitie (09/25/2014) [-]
Technology isnt relevant when discussing military size? Tell that to 135,000 japanese, or 80 million ( estimated ) native americans,
#51 - wyldek (09/25/2014) [-]
Yeah, there are instances of technology being very important to victories, but there are also cases where it counted for jack shit (Isandlwana anyone?), but that's not the point.

We don't have a navy for any unruly natives anymore. And the nuke was a military project funded by military money. We wouldn't have been able to develop it without the large wartime infrastructure and funding we had. One might call that a big military.

We have large a large military because there's a chance some crazy is gonna start a conventional war, which we haven't REALLY seen in decades (although Gulf War 2 counts, it was kinda short). And in a conventional war, excepting some CRAZY technological advantage, the larger military with the most resources and best logistics (all of which cost money that you're using on the military) has the advantage.

And holy shit, how did this get so off topic. I'm not even agreeing with Romney that we need a big navy. Im just saying the presidents analogy was shit.
User avatar #37 - theruinedsage (09/25/2014) [-]
Actually, you did have submarines.
User avatar #38 - bigredthunder (09/25/2014) [-]
guess you learn something new everyday. Allow me to correct myself, we had no nuclear subs at the time
User avatar #39 - theruinedsage (09/25/2014) [-]
Now that is very true, and those present a very VERY different role from normal subs.
User avatar #33 - slenderwolf (09/25/2014) [-]
Our navy may have shrunk over the years, but it's still nothing to sneeze at.
User avatar #27 - severepwner (09/25/2014) [-]
So lacking in naval power is fine as long as you can counter with a sick burn?

User avatar #30 - deadnanners (09/25/2014) [-]
the only severe thing is your lack of pwning anything but yourself
#26 - flipped (09/25/2014) [-]
#10 - my favorite is when 40-year-olds without a college education t…  [+] (5 new replies) 09/25/2014 on MFW republicans and... +35
#26 - siden (09/25/2014) [-]
what difference would a college degree make if they talked down 2 u
#35 - broswagonist (09/25/2014) [-]
#29 - anon (09/25/2014) [-]
Lack of higher education?
User avatar #12 - Kairyuka (09/25/2014) [-]
And young people who have been taught those antiquated ideologies
User avatar #11 - hairysmellyanus (09/25/2014) [-]
It really is. My dad thinks glenn back knows everything. It's fucking pathetic.
#10 - bitch that grip is awful who the **** taught you to pla… 09/25/2014 on not amused +1
#232 - or maybe somebody who actually DOES something you ******* …  [+] (1 new reply) 09/25/2014 on SJW takedown 0
User avatar #242 - noblexfenrir (09/25/2014) [-]
Yes let's vote for the assistant of the Virtual boy 2.0.

Livingston is the only worthwhile person to vote for since he's one of the few with credentials to bother with. Yoshida maybe, but I think Microsoft boosted the PS4 sales more than any action taken by Sony.

Pewdiepie is only being propped up because you really don't have to convince anyone to, they just will out of pure fanboyism which is basically what we want to make sure Anita doesn't have a chance. Considering the fact that their can be hordes of SJW's and white knights who will blindly vote for her, I just don't think asking people to vote out of pure basis of merit and self-worth in the gaming community is going to cut it.
#40 - my favorite part is when it takes them 20 seconds to transform…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/24/2014 on Transformer Porn +1
#57 - dangosevenonethree (09/24/2014) [-]
I've always just assumed that they transform based on how fast they need to move. Like if you're really relaxed, you take your time getting out of your seat, but if you're in a hurry, you jump right the hell up in a hurry.
#186 - how is pewdiepie a step up  [+] (1 new reply) 09/24/2014 on Guess Who's Nominated 0
#228 - trollofhalo (09/24/2014) [-]
He's not gonna force the 12 year olds of the world to scream at their parents for buying them non SJW games
#12 - "omg the accuracy I mean I've never left my stepdad's b… 09/24/2014 on Robin Williams on Canada +65
#23 - despite the unnecessary use of the word retarded you're co… 09/23/2014 on It was written by people 0


Total unique items point value: 550 / Total items point value: 700
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #5 to #4 - lazorman (05/19/2012) [-]
User avatar #6 to #5 - lazorman (05/19/2012) [-]
User avatar #7 to #6 - lazorman (05/19/2012) [-]
User avatar #2 - Natelawl (09/15/2011) [-]
So, i payed attention to your comment on my content.
You said you produced music? I'd like to hear a bit! Link please? :D
User avatar #3 to #2 - lazorman (09/15/2011) [-]
haha sweet!

the newest track i've made is for a remix contest... if you like it, you can vote for it on the 16th <3 lol
User avatar #1 - BobTheDestroyer (12/30/2010) [-]
why wont you love me?
User avatar #9 to #1 - lazorman (11/12/2012) [-]
yo idk gucci mang
 Friends (0)