logic-is-overrated

I pretend I'm sleeping. Nobody tries to talk to a person who is sleeping.

^^^I think we should give the Chuck Norris jokes a proper burial and let them rest in peace.^^^

I would've been the bigger man and kept my composure. Doing anything else would solve nothing and just waste more time/be more of a hassle.

What exactly is the question? If you're given elemental composition then you don't just divide you have to go through conversions and moles and stuff like that.

In Georiga if we get any snow that sticks to the ground school closes. If it gets below freezing our school closes. Even if it rains too much our school closes.

An army of Indians in bikinis would win the war. That much bizarre sexiness would make their heads explode.

My favorite nickname is the sexy rugged manly womenater.

My favorite color is blue. I feel smarter from participating in this discussion already.

Cuddly loveable cute bears staring at you would be freaky.

I have a long dark beard and I kick my cat at least 20 times a day to make it leave me alone.

But the amount of skill it takes to hit those small areas is incredible.

Exactly. He's like Rambo for t.v.

Actually, Chuck Norris can divide by zero. But he's not here...... or is he :D Chuck Norris is everywhere. The problem with that theorem is this I believe: They go from (a-t/2)^2=(b-t/2)^2 To a-t/2=b-t/2 If you plug in for example 5 for a and 6 for b then you come up with this: 5-11/2 = 5-5.5 = -0.5 for the first side and 6-11/2 = 6-5.5 = 0.5 They could have went ahead and squared the equations using the postulate (x)^2 = (-x)^2 but to find the square root of both sides like they did leaves a positive number equaling a negative number which is not possible. Of course I could be wrong; i'm not really sure. *edit* I think the person above me explained it.

I do believe that when you have (x)^2 = (-x)^2 you can't get rid of the power because a number does not equal its negative. That might be wrong and I could have no idea what I'm talking about but I do believe that's right. Either way, Chuck Norris would know.

That has to be a record or something.

I don't see why some words are considered swear words. If you get mad and say "crap" and somebody else gets mad and says "the 4 letter word that starts with s and ends with it" then you both got mad and used a word to express your anger. Both words mean the same thing and are used in the same way yet somehow one is worse than the other? I tell you it makes no sense to me.

Buy your friend. If not then I guess you'll have to go with the car.

And guess what - 100% services cuts too! Nobody to defend you if someone declares war on you, no sewer, no running water, no electricity, no gas, no doctors, no education for your kids, no library, no roads. You then have to pay other people to do all those things for you, so basically you end up paying anyway.And the very second someone hears about a hookers head on a mantle his country will be liberated.

No. I have manly hair. Manly hair makes me manly. Manly men ftw. Gross. Hehe, jk :P Having a beard is like having a furry little animal that you can pet whenever you want. And it gives you something to play with when you're bored. There's a ton more reasons why beards rule but I'll stop so I don't make the hair impaired people jealous.

No. I have manly hair. Manly hair makes me manly. Manly men ftw.

I'm pretty sure once they define annoying it's going to refer to serious harassment and it's going to be just like other harassment laws. Small things like a flame on a message board won't be prosecuted just like something small such as insulting your friend won't be prosecuted. It seems pointless because the law is so vague now but if they clarify it and it does end up as trying to stop harrassment online then I think it's a step in the right direction.

I retract this comment for the good of the public.

So a bully that typed in green would just be unbearable.

My name is logic-is-overrated and I approve this post.

It's hard to be certain since everything is so ambiguous right now but it seems to me that this is simply a step to prevent cyber-harassment. Prohibition does not work in any form and these new laws apparently have their flaws but if this is what I think it is then I think it's a step in the right direction.