pimento64

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Who's offering objections? The only thing either of us were ever doing is making fun of OP for acting like a walking stereotype. Sometimes people will make fun of you to your face for no other reason than that you're acting goofy: they're not enraged, nor upset, nor attacking your beliefs, nor attacking you as a person. What I am doing is making fun of people for having a terminally online debatelord mindset and a martyr complex. There is no packet heading for emotional baggage, let's all keep it on the client side of our routers.

And yeah I can tell from the histrionics that he's probably 14, at least emotionally, but it doesn't mean I'm not going to make fun of him when he says dumb shit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (4 children)

...How can you even take yourself seriously? You're legitimately crossing the threshold where if I tried to mock 14 year old reddit atheists, and I just wrote that out verbatim, people would say I'm going too far because nobody actually says shit like that. It discredits atheism, I'd rather be a fundy than talk like I'm in a fan sub of Death Note.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (7 children)

I believe I made it quite clear that I get to do the pithy bot mot that's actually nonsense, stay in your lane.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Stamets is an internet celebrity, bro. He was right to stomp on your personhood, you had the temerity to disagree with his august opinions of his favorite network TV shows. Shame on you.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (9 children)

Feel free to skip the overwrought metaphor

Well there goes 90% of the show, so no, you get the long version now.

We're both standing in the middle of a soundstage (lit like a European discotheque), and you whisper-talk at me at a volume 0.01% louder than the score:
"I'd love to hear some of these examples of bad writing in the show! You can feel free to skip all of the overwrought metaphors."
and I respond
"Well if I skip the 'overwrought metaphors', I seriously doubt I'll have anything left to talk about!" then you say something about how hard this is on you emotionally, I quietly affirm that I'm here for you, then you bitterly reject it, and then I pinch off a pithy-sounding bon mot that's actually nonsense, and walk off, leaving you standing stock-still in the grip of Powerful Emotions. Then we repeat all of this six more times, taking breaks for vomit-inducing scenes where 15,000 suicidally depressed animators shove every single item in the effects library onto the screen.

But seriously, I know you're just sea lioning. It's not possible to ask that question in good faith. Imagine if I snottily asked you to give me an example of bad writing in 1994's It's Pat, you would tell me "uh, fucking everything, piss off" and you'd be right to.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Oh, look. Fallacy fallacy. How predictable. I have been well and truly out Facts and Logic'd, m'gentlesir

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Standardization doesn't mean completely static. Would you care to point out where I said that?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (10 children)

OP's bravery is off the charts, and he just got a cool new shirt

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

Special Edition and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

The obvious answer would be any Buñuel film, Un Chien Andalou was released in 1929 and is appreciably more viscerally intense than pretty much anything on TV today. Far from the only example. Don't fall into the trap of thinking our modern ideas are new, they aren't, everything new you will ever see was previously thought of, tried out, and discarded by past people whose culture didn't have a use for it at the time. Everything. It's incredibly misguided to think a modern cartoon would be overwhelmingly intense to a supposed primitive of the 1960s, only perceived as colors and motion. It's a form of teleological presentism that perpetuates the fiction that we're somehow more intellectually developed than people who came before us. That happens a lot. It makes us uncomfortable to admit that a paleolithic man could function as well in a modern office as any of us, so we invent feel-good myths about how we're more intellectually sophisticated than every past generation, but we aren't. Not socially, not biologically, not at all. It isn't surprising that people still believe in pop-pseudohistory like the so-called Dark Ages, a Renaissance fiction.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Ask me how I know you're not into foreign and independent film of that time period, nor from the several decades preceding it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

"That was the stun setting. This is not. I can reduce this pumping station to a pile of debris."

—Data, the most sophisticated android in the federation, conducting diplomacy

view more: ‹ prev next ›