Assume Nothing

Banned for having failed to post on Christmas Day.

This thread is most definitely deserving of a bump - especially on Christmas Day. I find girls who can illustrate intelligence and strong personality extremely attractive for some reason. The weird part is - I don't even understand it - 'why?' Is it possible that the mind could be considered a physical factor of attractiveness? EDIT - It reminds me of this sketch

I fail to see how that's funny. It's simply an irate message spoken as a last resort, seemingly in anger.

Banned for being apathetic.

In a nutshell, you lack articulation skills, despite having strong abilities to converse via written communications? I find that interesting, because I feel the same way, although it's noted that the opposite is true. Hmmm

Banned for the provision of an irrelevant reason.

Banned for not providing a reason, but rather the provision of a question under the pretense of reason.

Banned for Blyaunte.

If the meaning isn't an irrational fear of ghost doctors I will be so mad. The fear of the contour of a male's genitalia through one's clothes. (i.e. 'is that a banana in your pocket...')

Banned for not living within a 50 mile radius of my location.

Thank you for sharing.

A witch bill.

Banned for intervention.

Banned for the use of an unnecessarily vivid rationalization.

Banned for assuming I care for your depiction of me.

Banned for causing market failure.

I wouldn't label it as an insane conclusion, or anything as such - rather, it's an unjustified assertion held by those who hold too tightly towards emotivism as opposed to utilitarianism.

Banned for assuming that I'm making an assumption - implications/suggestions need not be intended - they're implicit.

Banned for implying that it's a negative thing.

Banned for the inference that 'bad = good'.

First sentence starts reasonably. Second is an understandable point of view. Last sentence sends it all to hell with a gigantic leap from left to right while tripping over your own feet in the middle. If you don't like pking, fine. But you're now allowing your dislike for the activity taint your reason to an insane degree. Why? Pking is a very childish activity. Everyone speaks of how you can get penguin hunting exp, and the like *without* going into the wilderness. You could also argue you can get rewards from killing monsters in dungeons rather than ruin other players' experience(s) by pk'ing them. So why would someone kill another player? Machismo? Or just the simple act of taking advantage of an unfair system? Whatever the reason it's pretty childish. Maybe it's not the age, but the bullying like mentality that pkers has leads me to believe they are pre-teens or slightly older. It's not really an insane conclusion. What? child·ish/ˈCHīldiSH/ Adjective: Of, like, or appropriate to a child. Silly and immature. Synonyms: infantile - babyish - puerile - childlike - boyish I see nothing in your argument that supports the proposition that 'Pking is a very childish activity' [sic] - the supposed reasoning isn't relevant to its alleged childishness at all. Please also understand there's a distinction between what a participant does, and what the activity involves - it's not PvP's fault that those who choose to partake in it do so in a way which is disruptive to others. It's the player's choice - it's not a flaw of the system. Please, also, explain how it's supposedly 'taking advantage of an unfair system' [sic] - why would I, or any other who don't agree on that matter, accept the proposition when you haven't provided reasoning? If you're going to raise a dispute, at least justify your position.

Banned for enjoying 'My Little Pony' too much.

In response to that, both would be applicable. Banned for not aspiring to be a metagamer.

Banned for use of a truism.

It is, unfortunately, not submitted. We shall see whether it'll be published within the foreseeable future.