Nerdsy

[quote name='Aceburner']I really don't like to gloat about people getting so epically served in such a career-crushing manner, but even as someone who's only ever played one M-Rated game and as such can care less about how horrifying he finds GTA, I still don't like the guy.[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]He hasn't been served quite yet. Those were only recommendations; he won't get a real verdict for a little while, it seems.[/color]

[quote name='liamc2'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"][SIZE="1"] ...hm, I have so many characters spinning around in my head I'm having difficulty picking which ones. I may be back.[/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]So pick them all. We encourage lots of suggestions, so go nuts.[/color]

[quote name='SunfallE'][COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]Only two suggestions from me for a character... [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]That's technically 11 suggestions. : P[/color]

[color=deeppink]Hooray for theoretical dollars.[/color]

[quote name='chibi-master']Off topic: And Nerdsy, leave my posts alone. [/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]No. [/color] [quote name='Allamorph']The point is, you people are arguing over two completely different aspects of love that are not mutually exclusive.[/quote] [color=deeppink]Now that's just it, I'm not. My stance is that love at first sight is not only not an aspect of love, but that it doesn't happen. "Love can happen on sight" and "love can only happen once you get to know someone" [i]are[/i] mutually exclusive stances. It's infatuation. It may lead to love, but it isn't love. [/color]

[quote name='chibi-master']No, no, you silly!:animesmil We have delusions that you can only gain by truly and whole-heartedly believing in the very depths of love. If you don't understand what I just said, then oh, well.:p[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]fixed. Love is not possibe at first sight because love is not based on sight. "Love at first sight" is infatation. It could develp into love, yes, but i's not love.[/color]

[color=deeppink]Doctor Who = massive goodness. I got into doctor Who when i was, like, 4, but then the local PBS stopped airing them within a year. So, until about 4 years ago, I randomly stumbled across the movie playing on some random channel. Then, a few months later, the series started. My experience with Doctors extends only to the First, Fourth (barely), Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth. So far, my favorite is the first, partially because of the low production value and hilarious delivery. I am extremely happy with Tennant, although the only thing I'd say he has over Eccleston is that he... [I]looks[/I] more like a Doctor. Sadly, I haven't been able to catch almost any episodes this season. : ([/color]

[YOUTUBE="Western Show on Super Mario World (スーパーマリオでウエスタンショー)"]tv-dEz9HW10[/YOUTUBE] [color=deeppink]NONSENSE[/COLOR]

[quote name='Sabrina'][FONT="Tahoma"] Uh I disagree, you've missed the point completely. The very heart of the discussion [I]is about semantics[/I] or at the very least some of the semantics involved in reading and understanding the Bible. [/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]I know what the discussion is about. Fasteriskhead said something in a way that other people took offense to, and they wanted him to explain himself. I was not addressing the discussion at large, merely that particular strain of logic. To use a word that gets thrown around here an awful lot, it's [i]nitpicky[/i]. And really, this PC insistence on "clarifying that it's an opinion" is just annoying. And for the record, I'm not saying that people shouldn't question the wording; no where in my post did I say that. I'm saying that that particular point holds no real merit. To use your argument, how can somebody think that it's okay to question somebody's wording but you can't question that question? And by all means, question my questioning of the question. EDIT: This is getting too off topic for my tastes. If you do care to respond, I suggest moving to PMs.[/color]

[quote name='Morpheus']This is assuming that gay people getting married is a problem.[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]No, it's recognizing that there are people who view it as a problem.[/color]

[quote name='Morpheus']The argument works in this respect; war is a larger concern than questionable morality.[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]No, it doesn't. Lesser problems should not be ignored simply because their are bigger ones. Hey, you know what else war is more of a concern than? Petty theft. Let's ignore that.[/color]

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman'][color=#9933ff][font=monotype corsiva][size=4]I don't see why so many people are up in arms about gay marriage when there are so many other important issues at hand. Things like the rising costs of fuel and food, the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and who's going to be the next American Idol should outrank if Bobbie and Benny or Debbie and Tiffani are getting married. Get your priorities in order![/color][/font][/size][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]Ah, the old "something's worse" argument. Because if it's not among the worst things there are, it doesn't deserve attention.[/color]

[quote name='Allamorph'][FONT=Arial] This automatically alienated you from that side for the simple reason that you stated a claim [I]as if it were fact[/I] instead of as if it were opinion. [/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink][b]No.[/b] We are not children, we should be able to have a discussion without someone holding our hands with some placating disclaimer. And I know what you're getting at and this is purely semantic, but saying something like "I think ponies are cool," is pharasing the sentiment a lot more like a fact then just saying "Ponies are cool. I mean, it's an absolute fact that I think ponies are cool. [/color]

[quote name='Allamorph'][FONT=Arial]Bosh.[/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]Balderdash. The entire article was written by Charles with imput from Cruiz. At best, he was paraphrasing something else I said that was significantly less harsh, infinitely more self-aggrandizing and not at all intended to be included in Otakupedia. Besides, I got all my Shift-bashing out of the way in [i]his[/i] article.[/color]

[quote name='Cruizr'][FONT="Tahoma"][SIZE="2"]I actually need my entry fixed since Nerdsy decided to add a final line that is way in left feild. "Cruizr has the miserable dictinction of having met Shift. However, to his credit, he has also met Nerdsy as well." I've met both of them and enjoyed myself quite a bit when I did. This line obviously came directly from Nerdsy who severely dislikes Shift while I myself do not. If that could be removed/fixed that would be great. ^_^[/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]That was all Charles.[/color]

[color=deeppink]I pulled this one out last joke thread, but it's classic enough to repeat. Q: Why can't Hellen Keller drive? A: Because she's a woman![/color]

[color=deeppink]Nowhere did I state or even imply that anyone thought that. [/color] [quote]This is saying that whoever wins the most votes from democratic registered voters will win the most from independents,[/quote] [color=deeppink]You're thinking too much about the parties. They're not aiming for Democrats, they're aiming for citizens of a contested state. The belief they're running on is that all the people in a state think similiarly; not a hard and fast truth, but far from an unrealistic generalization. If one candidate is more able to sway a group in a state than his or her opponent, then that candidate will supposedly do better in that state. On another, more manipulative level, it's about charisma. Which one can get more people (and that's the primary word: people, not Democrats, Republicans, or Independants) to like him or her. I'd also like to point it's not about who [b]will[/b] win the most votes, because that really can't be measured. It's about who is [i]most likely[/i] to win the most votes.[/color]

[quote name='Morpheus']The problem is that there is an assumption that supporters of one candidate will shift to mccain from the other, which really isn't likely, especially since most primaries are closed.[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]I don't think anyone actually believes that a significant number of people will abandon a political party for the other just because their nominee of choice isn't picked. Where are you getting that? the idea is that the strongest candidate will be more able to capture the moderate vote. [/color]

[quote name='Sabrina'][FONT="Tahoma"] I'm beginning to think that other than a rare few out there, gentlemen just don't exist anymore.[/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]In my experience, the chivalrous get mocked and insulted.[/color]

[quote name='Morpheus']The problem with saying that Hillary wins swing states is that she's winning them against Obama, not Mccain. [/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]That's not a problem, that's exactly the point: finding which Democratic candidate is going to recieve more votes. The one with with the most votes in a contested state is considered the one most capable of beating the opponent.[/color]

[quote name='Allamorph'][FONT=Arial] This basically means I am Moriarty incarnate. Insult me at your peril.[/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]So what you're saying is it wouldn't be hard at all to trap you in a memory module. This information pleases me.[/color]

[quote name='Sabrina'][FONT="Tahoma"] No, it's one's right to not associate with someone, whatever the reason may be. [/FONT][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]Whether or not it's a right has nothing to do with how childish something is. Don't get me wrong, it's far from a childish decision. Dishonest to do so only after everybody else knows about the guy, yes. Childish, no.[/color] [quote]You're really going to have to come up with something better than "This guy he is friends with said something I don't like." [/quote] [color=deeppink]Here's something better: "This guy who is his [b][u]spritual leader[/b][/u] said something I don't like." Reread Allamorph's last post. He summed it up nicely.[/color]

[color=deeppink]Nerds suck. If people called me a nerd, I may just have to punch them right in their stupid faces.[/color]

[quote name='xa0s']Uh, please do excuse me for inquiring such question such as this. Ive been member of theotaku.com for quite a long while, and from what I reckon, there used to be a list of animes with "egbert" type of thumbs up and down for each flicks. Now its all fan art works? That's not what I signed up for in the first place. Could you kindly tell me where it is or if it is no longer supported ?[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]Uh, you mean Ebert? I'm pretty sure theO hasn't reviewed specific films in quite a while. They did DVD reviews before Vibrant launched, is that what you're talking about?[/color]

[color=deeppink]I'm a published author. It sucks. I wrote it against my will and it was published against my will. Stupid school.[/color]