Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Please read the forum rules before posting.

Check if you are posting in the correct category.

The Off Topic section is not meant for discussing Cookie Clicker.

Jarr2003 ✭✭✭✭✭

The new FNaF game is actually really good


Last Active
  • Re: The Quality "roast me" thread, don't need to pay tickets to come and give a shot to roast Brainstorm

    Honestly, I don't even need to roast you. I could pull out any one of your posts, show them to someone, and they'll understand how much of an idiot you are immediately.
  • Re: 15,000

    leave the forum
  • Re: If you could go back, would you still support Trump?

    Honestly, would it be any better to have Hilary as the president instead? She and Trump were the only candidates who had a realistic chance of winning in the last couple months of the election, so if Trump hadn't won, Hilary would've.

    So far, Trump hasn't done anything too dangerous, and I have no doubts that the nation would be feeling similar (if slightly less distraught) if Hilary won instead.
    Hell no. Never have, never will.

    It's been a train wreck, and I'd prefer we do whatever we can with whatever self-preservation skills we have left, to prevent this shit from happening again. Then again, humans are notoriously stupid. >.>
    It's legitimately getting annoying hearing people complain about Trump without giving reasons why. Could you please provide a legitimate explanation with sources, rather than complaining whenever Trump is mentioned?

    Seriously, it's literally fear-mongering to complain about how Trump's "ruining America" and how "it's been a train wreck" when you're not giving us any reason to agree with you. You can literally use this to describe any politician who is currently in office. Saying "Trump is bad" doesn't change anything, so why say it again when you and thousands of others have said virtually the same thing, many of which with virtually nothing to actually add to the conversation.
  • Re: Should Hate Speech be Legal?

    Not in front of children who don't know how to use words properly
    So you're saying that people should be arrested for saying "fuck" in front of children?
    Just to clarify, I was joking when I said this. I didn't actually mean I consider that hate speech.
    It isn't legal in my country and I am thankful for that. Humans abuse the right of free speech far too much to deserve it.

    Basically what the below post says.
    Hate speech needs to be defined because each person has a different definition.
    For me hate speech is about inciting hatred or targeting someone with abuse. Sending someone multiple messages saying hateful things about their race/religion/sexuality/disability/gender (identity)/anything else I forgot, is wrong.
    Making 1 joke saying all muslims are terrorists is fine. Trying to stir up hatred of muslims is not.
    I have to disagree with you on this. It doesn't matter whether it's offensive or not, whether humans abuse free speech or not, ultimately it is still a human right. The right to free speech is a necessity, and attempting to limit such a thing because you don't want people's feelings to be hurt is a short sighted and ultimately not even effective "solution." Seriously, think about it. We all hate the Westboro Baptist Church (for example), but why? Because they say crap like "god hates fags." But when the Westboro Baptist Church can't share their beliefs, no matter how backwards they are, it becomes easy to forget just how bad they really are. Furthermore, when they can't share their beliefs, it just gives them more ground to stand on. Like I've said before, groups like the Westboro Baptist Church need to be allowed to say stuff like "god hates fags" because most people, when they hear that, they immediately understand why the Westboro Baptist Church is so hated.

    Furthermore, why the hell would you trust politicians to say what is free speech and what is hate speech. You yourself have said that all politicians are corrupt, yet you seem to support the idea of them deciding what is okay to be said, and what is not? When you have people in office who say that safety is more important than human rights, why would you ever support the idea that these people should be allowed to control the very things that you say? It's only so long before someone tries to change what is considered "hate speech" in the UK, and it's only a downward spiral from there. Free speech is a necessity, whether you like it or not.
    Edit: Oops... I misread that as ILLEGAL. MY BAD.

    Certain types of hate speech should most definitely be illegal. Spreading hate and threats of violence toward a certain group of people is not protected under free speech at all. Want to know why?

    Well... there are actually limitations on free speech, such as CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER. Threatening ethnic/religious/sexual orientation/other groups with violence and hatred is clear and present danger for the targets.
    I dunno where you live, but in America, hate speech is 100% free speech. You seem to be referring to threats, which are considered illegal, at least when said threats are considered serious and dangerous.
    Under the assumption that by "hate speech" you mean "all of X group must die" then no, it should not be legal.

    Those sorts of things can only do harm.
    Just because something is purely harmful does not mean it should be illegal.
  • Purchase all available upgrades button

    When you ascend, a lot of the first five minutes is just spam clicking upgrades. It would be nice to have a button that purchased the upgrades for you, instead of having to manually click every upgrade. Maybe it could even be a heavenly upgrade.