Zierro

I prefer pale girls over tan. I tan really well, but since I'm nocturnal I'm usually pale.

Yep. No religion, political view, skin color, country, or Dungeons and Dragons Moral Alignment is safe from having a stupid member taint the name.

So from what I've gathered across multiple sites is... he's an "anti-terrorist" (anti-nazi, anti-Islamic, against hate ideologies, and against low security).... who uses terrorism to get his point across?

I guess it just depends on the context of the usage. A boxer who boxes because he is a sadist and likes to inflict pain on others deserves to have his interest shunned, but it doesn't necessarily make boxing evil. A gamer who plays because he is afraid of real life interaction and would rather live in a simulated safe world deserves to have his lifestyle shunned, but it doesn't necessarily make video games an anti-social barrier. A junkie who sells all of his family's possessions for his next fix deserves to have his priorities shunned, but it doesn't necessarily make heroin a life/relationship-ruiner. It is my opinion that it should come down to the individual. These objects and activities around us are not the problem - it is our relationship with the objects and our lack of exercising precautions and responsibilities when tampering with the objects/activities. That being said, I'm quite skeptical about the percentage of responsible heroin users, given the fact that I'm not even used to seeing many people handle marijuana or alcohol responsibly. At least not in this country.

Reminds me of one of my annoyances: When employees [bleep] about customers for existing. Really, you expect someone to pay you just for standing in a shop all day and nothing more? You're really that [developmentally delayed]ed and self-centered?

Surely the psychologies behind partaking in dangerous activities differ immensely in this respect (which is why I had "addicting" in quotation marks), but it doesn't change the fact that people still do them anyways. People know there is a good chance that your body can develop physical dependency to such a euphoric substance, just as they know there is a good chance getting punched in the face repeatedly can cause brain damage. My main point was that making the choice to sacrifice your own personal health for the well-being of your soul (or we can just call it entertainment) is nothing new to our society. Whether the draw is physical or mental doesn't really make much of a difference - people want what they want. The social stigma towards heroin usage seems to point at selfishness and not contributing to society, whereas at least boxers provide live entertainment.

From what I've seen, sports can actually be just as "addicting" as drugs are. There are plenty of professional wrestlers who have taken blows to the head, recovered from broken limbs, and accumulated an assortment of other physical problems, but yet you still see them in the ring pursuing their passion. Now that's an adrenaline junkie. Same goes for excessive video gaming. Anything with long-term detrimental effects, that humans regularly like to take part in anyway, should ideally fall under the same category of recreational drug use.

Because while some people are worrying about how to feed a family of five dinner for the next couple of days, other people are concerned about "the principle of the matter". Nothing but a lack of perspective.

But now the question is, can you shoot your own legs?

Tool - Aenima Danny really is the best drummer out there. Iron Maiden - Revelations (Live [much better than studio])

I always wondered what that was for. And now I know. :D

K2 usually doesn't do [cabbage]. I can recall of one exception though: Mr. Nice Guy. A couple bong rips from this guy and my whole world was upside down. For the next few days, everything was just different. Normal activities like eating, showering, and sleeping tripped me out. It was kind of scary because I never had an experience that strong before, but kind of fun at the same time.

No, but I'm not totally okay with allowing "meanness" to overtake your emotions and in some cases your life either. "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." -Eleanor Roosevelt

I think it's good exercise to prepare children for the dangers IRL.

Well see that's the exact thing. I'm the type of gamer who likes to balance fun with effective strategy. Of course getting a team of Gengars would ensure a higher win ratio, but I'm also looking to do battles that are interesting. I used to be the kind of trainer who found out what the top Pokemon are and then sweep everything with them, but I got bored of that. After the release of Black and White, I saw this as a great opportunity to be more liberal about training methods and mix things up a bit since there are so many Pokemon to choose from. But that being said, after skimming through some of your post, you seem to be very knowledgeable in this field and I'll definitely consider your competitive advice when building my teams up. I'll have to read the rest later on though because I have to go right now.

Internet sadism.

Thanks, I appreciate the advice. Now this is where I was going with them: Gengar is a fantastic sweeper, just as Forretress is a fantastic tank. So fantastic in fact that they are an extremely common choice amongst many trainers. So extremely common in fact that they are expected. The purpose for some of my Pokemon is solely to throw off opponents who prioritize an all-out-offensive approach or tank sapping. As for Torterra, he is bulky, strong, but lacks speed. I accept that Torterra will always go last, since even training those 252 EV's in Speed won't be enough to catch up to the vast majority of Pokemon out there. But his offensive and defensive power are both very well-rounded for a starter. As I stated before, pure sweeps and pure tanks are so common nowadays that the only viable option of succeeding over organized opponents like that is to evolve your strategies for that specific occasion. If I use Leech Seed, my opponent will think Torterra is a tank with no real stopping power. If I use Wood Hammer, my opponent will think Torterra is a sweeper that can't take a hit. Sure, I am opening up another new weakness, but also employing the element of surprise at the same time. And in the Pokeconomy full of anticipated sweeps and tanks, the odds are in my favor. In the last competitive battle I've done (the only rule we abide is that only one legendary is allowed), I used a team of tricksters to take down an IV-hacked Tyrannitar, Gengar, and Rayquaza. The key I learned was not to use the same move sets people are used to seeing 75% of the time because their team is usually prepped up to counter them. Of course you can't have an entire team full of reverse psychologists. Salamence's purpose is a pure physical sweeper. In that case, the speed boost of Dragon Dance compared to the accuracy boost of Hone Claws is a better idea, because I don't see Rock Slide being used as often as his Dragon and Fire moves. Swallow was an "ehh" choice for me, but Drifblim's purpose is to survive long enough to get a lucky Ominous Wind to Baton Pass the hell out of there. He's already pretty durable though, so Swallow might not be necessary. As for Probat (I already trained this one), Fly works great for him. It's strong and it keeps him away from battle for a turn which is helpful for someone with a Poison move. Roost might be a better option than Haze though because Probat can take some hits. As for Umbreon, we'll see about that in a couple weeks. :-D Judging by his stats, he seems to be one of those hit or miss Pokemon like Cloyster. But all in all, this is the exact thing I love about Pokemon. So many strategies that there can never be one universally perfect team out there. Again, thanks for your reply and feel free to give more constructive criticism.

Which state are you looking into?

I think you meant to say that Scrubs is awesome. Otherwise you might as well just go and divide by 0. It has the most pathetic cast of characters I've ever seen. 0/0 = Scrubs

The idea of starting from scratch and attempting to get into a good college might be possible, but it's very far-fetched for most. In some cases, it is literally a privilege to be able to work your ass off. I agree that we shouldn't just be giving out "free lives" to anyone asking for it, but the class gap we're facing right now, paired with the fact that the correlation between hard work and wealthiness is far from substantial and is actually rather luck-based, I'd say, as someone pretty impartial to most political affairs, that our economic standing is pretty lopsided. Of course those who had Dad buy them a car, enroll them into a good college, or hand over the family business don't like to listen to this point.

Scrubs.

I agree with you there. Yes, what a "fat" country you live in: The struggle to eat: As Congress wrangles over spending cuts, surging numbers of Americans are relying on the government just to put food on the table I didn't say all Americans are fat. In fact, I wasn't even referring to obesity - moreso the "fat" spoiled mentality some Americans have, which leads to other Americans starving because they are supposedly already well off with their hand-me-down outdated technology. Well said.

So Dingo, if someone murdered your entire family and the whole situation caused you to be more grateful about life and so you end up becoming a successful millionaire political hero, you would give thanks to the criminal for causing your enlightenment? Are you sure you're not just trying to be obscure?

Heh, I eat pizza straight out of the oven. Of course it burns my mouth and I have scabby gums for the next couple of days, but piping hot food is so delicious. =P~

French toast and waffles are great so long as they're hot and drenched in syrup. I don't see the appeal behind pancakes though. I will eat them if someone else makes them, but they're just too... plain for me. Oh my fecking. This.