Search Results - SC2 Mafia
Register

Search:

Type: Posts; User: secondpassing

Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.07 seconds.

  1. Replies
    62
    Views
    415

    ►►Re: Punishment Vs Reformation & prisons.◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    True but I was talking about violent crimes. How many violent criminals are psychopathic?
    The statistic is for those in prison. I'm not sure how many of them have committed a violent crime.

    Psychopathy leads to a disregard for the conscience/don't have one (depending on definitions) and so I'm sure there are a lot of psychopaths that swindled so hard they landed themselves in jail. They would be hard to rehabilitate as well, no?
  2. Replies
    62
    Views
    415

    ►►Re: Punishment Vs Reformation & prisons.◄◄

    I think it would also be an easier debate instead of pitting punishment vs rehabilitation (which is what the public could see as another waste of money) than if people just saw the issue as: how much should we spend on punishment?

    That way, alternative methods to curb crime could be considered. The rate of criminal activity varies based upon their environment. So I'm all for urban planning, education, and classes for public figures so they can learn how to interact with the community better.

    And just to repeat what others have said: capital punishment uses more money than life imprisonment, rehabilitate people that can be
  3. Replies
    62
    Views
    415

    ►►Re: Punishment Vs Reformation & prisons.◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    I dont know much about rehabilitation, but as far as I can tell a not-insignificant percentage of people who commit violent crimes are not psychopathic. These ones are probably redeemable... I suspect the majority of violent criminals arent - especially with horrific crimes like rape or murder. I do support the death penalty for those who cannot be rehabilitated, although this should be balaneced such that you need an overwhelming amount of evidence to execute someone.

    Ive heard that male aggression declines between 20-27. So if someone went to jail when they were 20, theres a chance they may be rehabilitated by the time theyre 27.
    "Fifteen percent of the prison population qualifies as psychopathic, while fifty to eighty percent qualify for ASPD," said Athena Walker citing: Ogloff JR. Psychopathy/antisocial personality disorder conundrum. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2006;40(6-7):519-528. doi:10.1080/j.1440-1614.2006.01834.x

    So you're right, a not-insignificant number of criminals are not psychopaths, you can even say a majority are not psychopaths, depending on your definition of that word. So anywhere between 7 and 40 percent of rehabilitation efforts are wasted.

    -As not everyone is rehabilitated (some prisons only have rehabilitation for 10 percent of their population source I forget from where)
  4. Forum:Serious Discussion & Debate

    Thread:Nuclear Apocalypse

    Thread Author:Ganelon

    Post Author:secondpassing

    Replies
    28
    Views
    225

    ►►Re: Nuclear Apocalypse◄◄

    So why not just make like a nuclear bunker that's built by the ocean or slightly underwater? It seems like you really like a submarine's nuclear reactor, and you're right in that it can efficiently transform uranium to energy. It takes very little space, and it lasts a long time. A bunker has a lot going for it. It's cheaper, you can grow food in it, you could potentially make artificial meat, you would just need to either hide the fact that you have a bunker so people don't shoot missiles at it.

    I think the reason bunkers don't use nuclear energy is just because it costs too much, or maybe it's because you need a permit from the government. Submarines, while ridiculously expensive function as a war machine, which is why we have them.

    Submarines can relocate though. That's dope.
  5. Replies
    23
    Views
    371

    ►►Re: When did masks become political?◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead View Post
    You're thinking too small-picture with the seat belts. If someone in a car isn't wearing a seat belt, they can become a projectile and fuck other people in the car up. People not wearing seatbelts also costs hospitals much more because they get fucked up more in accidents, which ends up costing the public more, especially in countries with a functional healthcare system.
    "Critics of laws like the requirement to wear seat belts characterize them as the work of "nanny government," interfering with the right of people to conduct their lives as they choose. There is an argument for that perspective, but it remains that people who ignore these laws (motorcycle helmet laws are a close relative) still expect society to take care of them when they are injured while ignoring laws intended to protect them. If the helmetless motorcycle rider suffers a traumatic head injury and has no health insurance (and one could argue that his health insurance shouldn't cover him if he acts recklessly and contributes to his own injury), we don't drag him over to the curb and wait for him to expire. We transport him to the hospital and expend considerable resources to save his life, even though there is little expectation he will be able to pay for this. This increases the cost of health care for all of us. Therefore, there is a "greater good" reason for seat belt and helmet laws that penalize drivers from their own neglect, because their negligence has an impact on everyone."

    -Tim Dees, Retired cop and criminal justice professor Quora Nov2012

    Forcing people to wear seat belts saves people and insurance companies money.
    Forcing people to wear masks saves people and insurance companies money.
  6. Forum:Circlejerk

    Thread:Give me my colors.

    Thread Author:Mesk514

    Post Author:secondpassing

    Replies
    9
    Views
    250

    ►►Re: Give me my colors.◄◄

    Good to see you
  7. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    The unintended consequence of typing out that religion made people view divorce as immoral...

    I wasn't even arguing whether or not people should get divorced or not, just that religious organizations' influence on the black community kept more families together. I feel a little bad that Ganelon is just getting hit.

    That being said, I think "In God we Trust" does indeed bring to mind a sort of identifying, "Hey my higher power backs me" which is religious. I'm pretty sure a lot of other countries have similar wording on their coins, so when those coffers are put to use in the war machine, which one is God backing? Pretty obvious to me that someone doesn't have a god, and likely both. Religiousness has done much wrong in the world.
  8. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    The union engaging in the civil war isn't a "good" act.
  9. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Furthermore, doesnt anyone else feel lIke politics has become much more polarized in the last 5 years or so? I cant recall a year that was as polarized as this. I guess in retrospect Bushs presidency was also controversial, although that is for some understandable reasons.
    Trump gaining the presidency has shifted the Overtom Window, the range of policies the public finds acceptable as a result of continued radical ideas being brought forth.

    "Build the wall!" vs stronger immigration control
  10. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    I understand your point but I am not sure why you refuse to separate the concepts. Yes Racism was a huge issue and was a morally reprehensible position taken by southern states. I have read the thread and I 100% understand that. I believe that the intention behind the action defines the morality of the action and its a very different discussion to look at the situation as economic or racially motivated. This difference has very direct bearing on the morality.

    This made no sense to me. I am not advocating for separating morality from the discussion. I am pushing to separate the concepts of slavery and racism so a discussion can exist on morality. Without doing so I do not see how much reasoning can be put into the conversation on morality. Maybe we should agree to disagree? I am totally open to changing my view there if you can open my mind to a different way of looking at the issue but I am not sure we are heading in that direction.
    I mean yeah I can swallow this. The north wanted economic control and access to cheap labor/base products and the south wanted to keep slavery. The north and the south were racist but the south much more so. The north killed a lot of people for material reasons, the south lost and had to submit under the economic control of the then federal government.

    Wars kill people and through this civil war the north kept in mind its economic interests, whilst the conclusion is that now a lot of black slaves became freedmen.
  11. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:What's up?

    Thread Author:Muso

    Post Author:secondpassing

    Replies
    15
    Views
    314

    ►►Re: What's up?◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Muso View Post
    not here tho
    I see you're feeling down. Wanna talk about it?
  12. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:What's up?

    Thread Author:Muso

    Post Author:secondpassing

    Replies
    15
    Views
    314

    ►►Re: What's up?◄◄

    Generally north.
  13. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    I would say Nah. I read the first 2 pages, skiped to participate, then felt guilty and read up... I want that portion of my life back >.<
    Wasn't entertaining .. aw.
  14. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Drizzt View Post
    Everything isn't black or white with me. Yes, Tucker Carlson is entertaining. No, I do not follow him and haven't really heard him in years. As for not reporting facts, I think you would need citations to back that statement up. I'm sure he's gotten plenty wrong, nobody is perfect.

    I'm not a conservative or a liberal. Someone mentioned Tucker Carlson, so I linked a humorous video. The video just so happens to highlight the importance of checking sources- my confusion was that you didn't understand that subject. Perhaps I, or you, misinterpreted one another.

    Does this clear things up?

    Cheers,

    Brock
    There was a good portion of this thread discussing Tucker Carlson. It was wrong for me to presume you had read it. Feel free to look back and read the thread or you could watch the video I linked. Here, I'll link it again:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ I'm sure Tucker reports fact fairly often, but he also reports facts that are irrelevant, that aren't facts, or misleading. It's good to check sources for accuracy, but it's also good to evaluate information for relevance, recency, and usefulness.

    Someone could classify me as conservative or liberal, but I like to think that I'm doing a good job staying politically neutral. I was confused as to why you thought the video was humorous in the context of the rest of the thread. Was it funny because it's so cringe, or perhaps because you liked Carlson and he nailed someone, or perhaps because Carlson was wasting his time on someone obviously doing something stupid. See, it was hard to tell if you had posted a video with the intent of it being satire.

    Chest-o
  15. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Drizzt View Post
    I agree with almost everything you said-actually nothing you said I disagree with. Tucker Carlson is pretty cool, I listened to him back on Bubba the Love Sponge radio show. Any time you hear about stats relating politics to IQ, i.e. the right is dumber stats wise, you have to remember bias. Who exactly is administering these tests? Are the majority of them liberals due to higher education being linked to leftist views? And what is intelligence anyways? The Wright Brothers invented flight but there was no evidence they were 200 IQ geniuses. And Oppenheimer was responsible, in part, for the nuclear bomb, but was he smart enough not to make it? He gave it to the military for peace, lol? The subjectivity and hate divides, but at the end of the day we haven't had a real left or right president in a long time. They all tend to fall left center or right center, even Bush and Obama.

    TL;Dr: If you want to make yourself upset, argue politics or religion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Drizzt View Post
    Well, the whole video was about the failure of reporter on checking their sources. And the fake activist was put on legitimate news organizations due to a failure of fact checking. I'm not sure if you're trolling or you truly don't see the dots here. I don't believe it was staged insomuchas the activist didn't know Tucker Carlson knew the whole thing was a sham. Just trying to bring a little sunshine to the conversation.

    Oh and god, if you're looking to fox news for actual news and not entertainment, you're gonna be dissapointed.
    I'm getting something wrong here. And I'm still not sure what I got wrong. So you like Tucker Carlson because he's entertaining, and you know he doesn't report facts. But you've been following him for a while.. to be entertained? I really don't know your stance on him. At this point it seems like you were telling a joke and the punchline flew over my head. If so, sorry about that, I don't get jokes often.
  16. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Drizzt View Post
    Did you watch it? The confrontation on live tv was funny. Checking your sources is the first rule of journalism. I heard a quote from a journalist once and it went something like this: "If your mother tell you she loves you, check your sources."
    Yes I did watch it, most of it anyway, skipped maybe the last minute because I didn't find the video all that interesting. Even if the guy being interviewed was legit (the whole thing looked staged) I don't understand why this would be news to me. So some guys are protesting Trump, and maybe some people are paid to protest Trump, it doesn't really matter to me, because I can find legitimate reasons to protest against this president. How would you get this person working for money onto an interview anyway? The guy says something like, "I wouldn't be interviewed on national television anyway, because I would definitely be vetted." So I have no reason to take the interview seriously. Additionally, Fox News and Tucker Carlson routinely spread misinformation.

    I can't tell why you are talking about checking your sources. Not sure what that was about. There's a Vox video on Tucker Carlson, wanna see?
  17. Replies
    20
    Views
    308

    ►►Re: 6/19 Suggestions / Bugs / Comm Recap◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    lol you're about to trigger voss
    Uh oh 😄
  18. Replies
    20
    Views
    308

    ►►Re: 6/19 Suggestions / Bugs / Comm Recap◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Voss View Post
    So, in order for me to build a good tutorial, I need to know who I'm creating the tutorial for. On top of that, I'd need volunteers to have a vested interest in helping me make sure that tutorial is solid. Otherwise it's wasted effort, right?

    I'd love to explore this in this thread or another one! I think another one could be more informative to other forum members though.
    I think the easiest way to get people to have a vested interest is to run a forum mafia game but on narrator.
  19. Replies
    20
    Views
    308

    ►►Re: 6/19 Suggestions / Bugs / Comm Recap◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    but actually I fixed the narrator link
    Thank you very much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Voss View Post
    I totally agree that some sort of tutorial is necessary!!!! I think this is big fish to fry though and it totally deserves it's own thread for the following questions:

    What sort of tutorial are you looking for? Here are a few that come to mind
    - Video tutorial, like on youtube.
    - Allow start with just yourself, filling in the game with bots
    - Build in the proper UI hints that would properly guide new players on the UI and mafia.
    - Write up a word doc for Q&A

    Who is my target audience?
    - Members of sc2mafia, who have arcade mafia experience
    - People who've played mafia before, IRL
    - People who have never played mafia before

    - People who want to host their own games, without me, Voss, being present.

    I could go ahead and do all the solutions above, but that'd take forever and probably have at least some wasted effort. So, in order for me to build a good tutorial, I need to know who I'm creating the tutorial for. On top of that, I'd need volunteers to have a vested interest in helping me make sure that tutorial is solid. Otherwise it's wasted effort, right?

    I'd love to explore this in this thread or another one! I think another one could be more informative to other forum members though.
    I accessed it through a computer (not sure how the discord version works) I would like to see UI hints(?). I mean, I want narrator to have little text boxes or speech bubbles that guide me through setting up my first game, hopefully it would match the steps to do so. Something like
    1. Is this your first time playing mafia? y/n
    2. Pick a setup to run
    3. Invite your friends here!
    4. When they join they will show up in the waiting lobby.
    5. Pick a pre balanced setup or adjust the roles.
    6. Roles will show on the right.
    7. Need to find players for a game? Join our discord!


    The above would be sufficient for me, but I imagine others might want a video. I think a simple screen record and a short voiceover would be sufficient for now. I also don't think a lot of people want to sit though a long tutorial, so I suggest speaking quickly.

    My first instinct after looking through all the elements on the narrator site is to hit start just to see what a day would look like, but it won't let me start without three people. I think it would be kinda cool to have an in-game recording so someone could simulate playing a match. If you wanted to appeal to people who never played mafia, I think this would be the way to go. I'm not suggesting that mafia on narrator be available to be played with bots that chat though. If simulating a game on narrator is difficult or too hard, another video of a recorded game could suffice.

    ___

    Speech bubbles > video tutorial with voiceover > simulated game
  20. Replies
    20
    Views
    308

    ►►Re: 6/19 Suggestions / Bugs / Comm Recap◄◄

    Didn't want to make a new thread and I didn't know where to post this question:

    Shouldn't you make like a tutorial or something? If I wanted to test run a game myself I have nowhere to go, and no idea how to start it up.
    Also I think the narrator link on top of the sc2mafia page might be broken.
  21. Forum:Narrator Discussion

    Thread:Prioritization - Help Wanted

    Thread Author:Voss

    Post Author:secondpassing

    Replies
    11
    Views
    251

    ►►Re: Prioritization - Help Wanted◄◄

    https://trello.com/b/wXnT5SQz/reorganized-by-priority

    No idea what I'm doing. Maybe this helps?
  22. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Drizzt View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4qQElJUYnM I love this video. If only Tucker Carlson was on staff; we'd have a great time.
    Why/how do you love this video?
  23. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Umpah umpah
    Good song. Saving this.
  24. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    The problem with fighting for education reform is that one would need to fight against people's active choices. School funding in a large part is from local taxes on the surrounding property. Which makes schools that have poor surrounding neighborhoods generally worse, and around rich neighborhoods good. People play a large part in segregation and move to nicer neighborhoods. As history would have it, rich people move to rich suburbs and are often majority white. Since moving is often a choice, letting good schools be in good neighborhoods does promote that those who want to succeed be placed in an environment that would promoted it.

    For example, schools in the Bay Area are known to be exceptional. The parents who moved into there are often Yellow and Brown, and their kids did exceedingly well in school. My class had like 3? Black kids, the last class that graduated had 0. The outcomes of having good schools is it is a huge bonus to the entire economy. The Bay Area has a lot of startups.

    So what could be the solution? We can't really prevent people from choosing what house to buy or what neighbors to have, but we could de-localize how property tax is distributed. That, however, causes another whole slew of problems. Emergency services, parks, and sometimes roads are funded locally. De-localizing property tax could require a greater need for government workers, as one would now need more civil engineers and accountants and what-not to redistribute the money to vital services.

    Another option would be to increase investment in low-income housing. Aside from the obvious problem of needing money, it also creates wrong incentives (externalities). Companies that build low-income housing are incentivized to use cheaper materials, and the people that live in them may not feel the same economic pressure that the people around them have to pay for rent. So sometimes they become addicted to drugs.

    What do you guys think about the education problem?
  25. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    [/B]

    No, I don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced. They also don't need to be told to get married.

    If 77% of black babies are born to unmarried women, how does divorce have anything to do with it? The statistic isn't "77% of black babies' parents divorce". They are born to mothers who aren't even married in the first place. Divorce has nothing to do with whether a child has a father figure in their life or not. Do you have a source that you can use to argue that somehow this is a problem due to divorce? Or are you just "chalking it up to divorce" based off of nothing?
    Why are we arguing over my poor word choice? Just focus on the problem. The problem is black kids don't have a father and/or a mother.
    I'll leave out divorce. The black community could use some strengthening of the family bond.
  26. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    Religion has its own moral code. That moral code does not apply to everyone. So you can say "religion can and did give people morals to live by" but all it's doing is enforcing its own moral code.

    Why is divorce an immoral act? You know what's immoral? A religious leader telling an abused wife to give her husband another chance and stay in the marriage to avoid a divorce. You know what else is immoral? Someone breaking their marital vows and betraying their spouse's trust by going behind their spouses back to cheat on them for years. Wanna know another one? Staying in a loveless marriage because marriage is "moral".

    "Marriage" is not a moral act. It is neither moral nor immoral. Same with divorce. Unless you're religious, and your belief is that marriage is ordained of god, and that divorce is a sin.
    I'm not saying religion hasn't commanded people to make horrible decisions based on a bad moral code. It has, I agree. My point is still valid though. I'll just repost it.
    "You don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced as often? Who will tell people that?"

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    Without getting too much into this topic, in 2015 77% of black babies were born to a single mom

    This has nothing to do with "divorce"

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/7...nic-immigrants
    Well, perhaps I was a bit careless with my wording. It definitely has to do with divorce rates though, but the problem of non-equal black outcomes also stems from black children growing up without both of their parents. One could chalk that up to divorce (like I did) or talk about lack of education on contraception or talk about black culture and it's influence on young males unwilling to pay child support or being sexually promiscuous or violent crimes creating widows and widowers, or victimization taking it's toll on the outlook of young males so they feel they should just do whatever.
  27. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    I'm not saying we should all convert to be Mormons, but if we can get black fathers to take care of their kids, the number of black kids leaving school, joining gangs, killing other black kids, going to jail, and being poor will be lower.
  28. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    This is biased conjecture.Morality does not depend on religion.
    Not entirely no, but religion can and did give people morals to live by. But it still stands that rejection of religion is one of the reasons why people get divorced more often. You don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced as often? Who will tell people that?
  29. Replies
    83
    Views
    2,036

    ►►Re: SIGNUPS: New Players of the Summer 2020 S-FM ???◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Frog View Post
    I'm willing to mentor if anyone wants to bounce ideas while playing this game!
    Yo someone pick up Frog. He's good.
  30. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Frinckles View Post
    And in the same vein, what else is tangible? Black communities living impoverished paying taxes to public schools who get less than white schools is not an issue of white privilege or Systemic Racism. It is an issue of economics. It is an issue of black children growing up without a father. Hell, one of the best platforms that the BLM movement has is the desire to help children in these situations grow up with communal guidance. To find an alternative to the nuclear family because it has become more and more uncommon. This is another complicated issue, but people do not talk about it. People don't feel warrant or authority to talk about it. A child's failures are left up to this wistless idea that they were destined to fail. That is wrong, and its what we're teaching them.
    Systemic racism is indeed real, but the poor outcomes of a black person growing up are less because of systemic racism and more because of culture, upbringing, victimization, and other stuff like it. The Black Lives Matter movement ended quite a few things in my state, a neighboring city's governor stepped down, our police chief stepped down, they defunded school police in troubled districts, so the movement has been successful(?) in getting stuff done; however, this does not solve the moral gap people lack.

    America, including black people, are left with a moral gap after the rejection of organized religion. I'm not saying those religions were "good", but they did have a societal function. Those regions (mainly Christianity) kept families together, got fathers to work for the welfare of the family, assigned roles to each member, and promoted the educating of the children by parents.

    People are free to reject religion, it's their choice, but people still need families, communities, and a sense of belonging.
  31. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by naz View Post
    I thought there was a serious discussion board on here too ooopppppssieeeee. I still stand by american football being dumb tho😛

    borders are dumb too whats the point of being patriotic ;3
    Yeah borders are dumb, we're all people
  32. ►►Re: The status of SC2 Mafia FM, and how we can (and must) improve it◄◄

    Welcome to Staff SuperJack and Ganelon.
  33. Forum:Circlejerk

    Thread:My name

    Thread Author:Ganelon

    Post Author:secondpassing

    Replies
    22
    Views
    1,017

    ►►Re: My name◄◄

    gan nell lon

    mag gor oth
  34. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Frinckles View Post
    This is smart.
    He's right because many parties are all about upholding the status quo, which makes the US's demo and repub parties both conservative parties. I'm going to give a good guess and say AUS's are the same.
  35. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Speaking of the fraud known as Jordan Peterson, isn't he paralyzed from an experimental treatment for benzo addiction?

    Why didn't he just clean his room rather than pop benzos?
    Benzodiazepine Abuse Overview
    Benzodiazepines are a type of medication known as tranquilizers. Familiar names include Valium and Xanax. They are some of the most commonly prescribed medications in the United States. Doctors may prescribe a benzodiazepine for the following legitimate medical conditions:

    Anxiety
    Insomnia
    Alcohol withdrawal
    Seizure control
    Muscle relaxation
    Inducing amnesia for uncomfortable procedures
    Given before an anesthetic (such as before surgery)

    ::

    I'm sure being attacked on the internet for being a nazi and a troll takes it's toll of those with a strong mental disposition.
  36. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is:
    What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism?
    A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis?
    Right-wing liberalism and conservatism are inextricably linked, I mean, it's in the phrase.
    As right is:
    a grouping or political party favoring conservative views and supporting capitalist economic principles.
    (https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/right)

    I was trying to find out what exactly you meant by righ-wing liberalism, and it seems like your definition is different than that of other people. Wikipedia puts right-wing liberalism with conservative liberalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_liberalism) but Wikipedia also connects conservative liberalism with religious or philosophy grounding, in which it's supporters believe in man's common goodness as the warrant (warrant: the underlying reason "people" can agree upon) to expand social liberties... but you're not religious nor a philosophy student. Either way, I think most of this site is going to group you into the conservative pile because most of this site is very very liberal. Just don't count me in that group. smileyface

    The media paints right wingers as immoral nazis because they want to.
  37. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    Did you guys know League of Legends is owned by the communist party of china
    Every company that wishes to do business in China must pledge to be not against communism.

    Many companies are openly state-owned.

    Some companies claim to not be state-owned, but the majority of shareholders are of the communist party, which make them effectively state-owned (huawei and xiaomi).

    The world is an interconnected web, so one could also correctly claim that the NBA and Blizzard and EA are owned by China.
    ::
    League of Legends was bought by Tencent or something.
  38. Replies
    800
    Views
    8,426

    ►►Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by rumox View Post
    Vox is cringe but this piece on Tucker Carlson sums up the wool pulling over the eyes the media does. This tactic isn't exclusive to Tucker or FOX. Better for them that we are mad at each other or just generally ignorant to the pressing matters.
    I like Vox. Quite democratic party leaning though.
  39. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by theoneceko View Post
    REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
    EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
    WHYDDON'T U TELL ME WTF OMG UWU OWO *NUZZZLESX3*

    LIKEKEIE I WON'T BASH U FOR UR RELGION, IMJUST VEREYY CUUWURIOUS!!!!
    UvU
    It's like wearing a t-shirt with the Target logo into an active warzone.
  40. Replies
    83
    Views
    2,036

    ►►Re: SIGNUPS: New Players of the Summer 2020 S-FM ???◄◄

    /reserve or mentor or sign
    preference in that order
  41. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by theoneceko View Post
    ur religious? wtf dude. which religion?!?!? UwU!!!
    :]
  42. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    My issue with the Christian God is that he claims to be all loving and all merciful and yet, a) look the shit that’s been going on all around us and b) he forced the Israelites, his chosen people, to wander through the desert for 40 years. Not exactly what I’d call merciful.


    There is an upside to this, though. Maybe God is just a very demanding but still loving father (although that seems hard to believe if you don’t exclude a significant part of the New Testament)
    Little off-topic but God as many Jews see Him was the one who forced his chosen people to wander in the wilderness for 40 years.
  43. Replies
    12
    Views
    257

    [WIP] ►►Re: The Eternal Conflict (13P)◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    Wowowow, this is still a WIP, don't hit on my lore yet! The lore I put up does not represent my beliefs at all, its point being to entertain and create a story for the game, not to spark a theological debate xD. If an almighty creator exists such as the Christian God, well uh, he doesn't go at war with Satan and lose, he just makes Satan disappear if he wants to... so take this as a "popular culture" good vs evil kind of lore.
    As for the human, he's there as a bridge between heaven and hell. You know, something like a Midgard-ish role.

    Hmm, I fear that people would not be involved in the game anymore if nights lasted an entire week, but I do think the chat part is an issue. I didn't want to make mafia perma-communicating at first, but I guess there's little reason not to do it. I thought about giving mafia a limited number of messages to eachother per day in a quicktopic, but giving them a permachat would be simpler.

    It's not reasonable to assume a level of activity of 500 posts per real life day in such a setup. The point of this setup is to have a game that keeps going while other games come and go, without spam. I don't want to restrict people's posting capacity, though: it's up to them to play according to the setup's spirit. Plus, more time to post also means more time to read, so I don't think that will be an issue. As a reference, you can look at MafiaUniverse's longest game ever to see that it only has 62 pages (3090 posts) after... five years. Note that MU games are usually of a level of activity close to ours.

    I see no need to remove an angel. On Mafiascum, the standard is 14 days per game day and two days per game night, and setups are balanced similarly to how they are here, I believe. The rolelist currently follows the general rule of thumb that is:
    Number of town slots = 3*Number of scum slots + 1


    But yeah, the point of this setup is not to paralyze the site for six months with a super long game that will be the only one hosted. It rather is to keep something to do for a long time, and to try an interesting way to play the game.
    that's the whole game

    i cannot force myself to care very much about the game, but it's across the board

    if nobody posts nobody cares

    if everybody posts everyone cares, but there's not much to talk about
    In the game you linked people kind of forgot about the game for weeks on end. Half the people are inactive, and the posts are what I would call low quality. They space their posts out by a week sometimes but only post one sentence. You don't think people are going to post every hour or so at least? Didn't read the whole thing, but skimmed it, and scum seem to be actively lurking. Like, actively, lurking. I actually don't think it's reasonable to assume that a longer phase game played here would be comparable. You might assume that players that have longer day phases would take more time to write their posts, but it's clear in that game it's not happening. How do I know?
    -lots of naked votes
    -some posts that consist of "."
    -one-liners about a sports game
    -complaints about people not talking
    I think that either sc2mafia has neither the attention span nor the patience to wait a month to post, but maybe people will adapt.

    My whole point about the night phases is that I think nights are important for scum. I think many players don't evaluate their night actions until night happens, and a longer night phase lulls town into apathy. You're right though, a night length of a week might get people to forget about the game. You could keep it at three days, you probably have a better view than I do anyway.

    Excited.
  44. Forum:Narrator Discussion

    Thread:Game 6/19 Interest Poll

    Thread Author:Voss

    Post Author:secondpassing

    Replies
    20
    Views
    623

    ►►Re: Game 6/19 Interest Poll◄◄

    Hope it turned out great.
  45. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Frinckles View Post
    A potentially interesting political conversation is now about semantics. Smh
    Still waiting on deathworlds to post why he thinks political science is gibberish. Was a fun enough topic to settle on.
  46. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganelon View Post
    If you want to know what my idea of God is:
    https://highexistence.com/the-last-answer-short-story/
    Thats pretty close to what I think god would be.
    A neither-malevolent-or-benevolent being propelled by curiosity and death?
    Interesting story.

    You've played Nier: Automata, right? I feel like you would enjoy the game more than I did.

    The Voice said, And you do not find thought and discovery worthwhile in itself? You do not find it requiring no further purpose?

    For a finite time, yes. Not for all eternity.

    I see your point. Nevertheless, you have no choice.

    You say I am to think. You cannot make me do so.

    The Voice said, I do not wish to constrain you directly. I will not need to. Since you can do nothing but think, you will think. You do not know how not to think.

    Then I will give myself a goal. I will invent a purpose.

    The Voice said tolerantly, That you can certainly do.

    I have already found a purpose.
  47. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    Also, imma refer you to this:
    Yeah, the axis that points up is the neutral stance.
  48. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    Non belief is not the same as belief lol.
    Let's say there may or may not be a criminal.

    Atheist: there is no criminal, no evidence points to a crime/evidence points to no crime
    Agnostic Atheist: probably there is no criminal, I don't know if there is enough evidence
    Agnostic: I don't know whether or not a crime happened, I don't know if there is enough evidence/there might be evidence but it doesn't point either which way, maybe there is a criminal <- neutral
    Agnostic Theist: probably there is a criminal, I don't know if there is enough evidence
    Theist: there is a criminal, the evidence is incriminating
  49. ►►Re: if you do not do the full version of this political quiz and post the results, you have no balls◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    I mean you could extremely easily read the definition of the words. Or do a web search on them instead of arguing.
    ag​nos​tic | \ ag-ˈn-stik , əg- \
    Definition of agnostic (Entry 1 of 2)
    1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable
    broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
    2: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something
    political agnostics


    athe​ist | \ ˈā-thē-ist \
    Definition of atheist
    : a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism

    ...

    An agnostic who is neither a theist or an atheist would be a true neutral.
Results 1 to 50 of 500
Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4