THEskinOFaROBOT

- friends
1 link karma
1,242 comment karma
send messageredditor for
what's this?

TROPHY CASE


  • One-Year Club

Would you stick your hand in there? by Blackhawx73in WTF

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

shhUTHEFRONTDOOR!

After I got this from my sis I had to admit I would be racist in this situation too... by stopherjjin funny

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 13 points14 points ago

As a people, this comment offends me.

After I got this from my sis I had to admit I would be racist in this situation too... by stopherjjin funny

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 11 points12 points ago

Why? The man's skin was "black" so shamorshin assumed the man's wife was the "black" lady, rather than the "white" lady. It was discrimination based on skin color, not some assumed ancestral land of origin.

Wait, I have something on my chin by b0redin WTF

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

WTF her name is NOT Channel Tapper.

300+ Economists, including 3 nobel laureates, petition the US government to legalize marijuana by erikNORMLin politics

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

I appreciate what they are trying to do, but this subject always bothers me. I am sure there are some people out there that have had their lives ruined by anti-pot laws. The masses don't care... because fuck 'em they're pot heads. Then, when the so-called economy is down, people start talking about how much sense it makes to legalize now, ya know, for the economy. The moral relativism in it just seems so blatant.

My duct-tape prom dress... by brennyannin pics

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT -1 points0 points ago

Arrested Development reference detected.

Ninja Cat: You think freezers can stop me? by metaphysicalfarmsin videos

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 15 points16 points ago

It's a Kanye West reference; Kanye West is a gay fish because he likes fishsticks.

The first dinosaur discovered in Spain is 5 million years younger than originally believed. by nomdewebin science

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

So their not extra-terrestrials, just ex-terrestrials? Use that with people whenever you're talking about aliens, and they'll alll just think you're being lazy with your pronunciation. "Aliens, you mean, like, ex-terrestrials?"

What are some "unwritten rules" you live by and/or expect from someone else? by TheBumskiin AskReddit

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 1 point2 points ago

Turn the bathroom fan off once in a while, don't leave it on all fucking day.

What are some "unwritten rules" you live by and/or expect from someone else? by TheBumskiin AskReddit

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 221 points222 points ago

Clean up after yourself when using common space.

For example, some of the people at workplace will actually leave their used napkins, wrappers, banana peels or other food wastes behind after they've finished a break-time meal.

It boggles my mind. There is nobody paid to buss the tables, so whoever wants to use that table next will have to throw the rubbish out before they can enjoy that space. Rude.

Seriously, who names their kid that? by meateein WTF

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

Shadynasty

It's a shame that miracles don't apply to physical deformities or amputees. by tree_monsterin atheism

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

It's ironic, he lost his legs because of science.

Do you think there should be a reconsideration of the drinking age in the US? by ikilledearlmillfordin AskReddit

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

What, pray tell, is the purpose of restricting the distribution of alcohol to individuals over the age of 21? If it be, as one might assume, to prevent our young adult population from engaging in irresponsible acts and behaviors, then perhaps we shouldn't even bother calling such individuals "adults" at all. If that be the case, then one might also wonder if these non-adults are fit to make other adult decisions, such as voting, driving, owning firearms, joining the military, buying pornography, getting tattoos, engaging in sexual activity, eating vegetables, or trading labor for wages. In any case, the line must be arbitrary and the real distinction can only be whether or not an individual has reached a the proper level of physical, mental and emotional maturation needed to make an informed decision regarding engaging in such behavior, as well as having the capacity to bear the responsibilities involved with doing so. Contrast that with a consideration of where government derives its power and a logical analysis of where and how that power can realistically be applied both legitimately and effectively. The answer of course is that the law must strike a balance between preserving liberty and providing security, i.e., the people must decide which behaviors and rights that might endanger people are acceptable for the preservation of freedom. But when we look at this analysis in terms of real-world consequences, it is certainly evident that adults over the age of 21 have committed tragic mistakes and some engaging habitually self-destructive behaviors while under the influence of alcohol. Meanwhile, we can also observe that in areas that don't enforce the same restrictions, individuals under the age of 21 can be found to use alcohol responsibly. Ultimately, I think the laws here in the US have been enacted as a means of stimulating an environment of productivity. That is to say, the government sees young sobriety as in investment in the future, believing, be it cogent or fallacious, that a sober young population will achieve a higher level of achievement that makes the nation stronger as a result.

ಠ_ಠ by KennyEdmundsin gaming

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

Nobody ever said this game was fair.

SOME
PEOPLE
GET KARMA
GET
OVER
IT

TIL That in 2011 it cost 2.41 cents to make a Penny and 11.18 cents to make a Nickel. by Jenni-oin todayilearned

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 1 point2 points ago

You contradict yourself. The numbers you gave show that the value of gold exceeds that of dollars, now you say the value of dollars exceeds gold.

You seem to think that for gold to back currency, all the gold would have to be rounded up and stored in one place. Why? All you need to do is have enough gold to back the amount of currency you have printed. It wouldn't need to be stored in one place, nor would it even have to be the government that issues the currency (though I'm not really sure why anybody else would want to).

TIL That in 2011 it cost 2.41 cents to make a Penny and 11.18 cents to make a Nickel. by Jenni-oin todayilearned

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 1 point2 points ago

Why not just issue a new currency then? In fact, anyone that held gold reserves could print their own currency (and anyone holding that currency could cash out for gold anytime they wanted). If we want to regulate it, audit the reserves periodically. I just don't understand how the argument of "there isn't enough gold" is valid, or how the sum total amount of gold is relevant.

What products can I buy that will pay for themselves? by timmmmyboyin AskReddit

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Shoes.

:(

Occupy Wallstreet - Ray Lewis, Ret. Police Chief, arrested. by bearsa113609in pics

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The purpose of the street is to facilitate traffic. This generally means bikes and motor vehicles--people aren't really suppose to walk down the middle of the road because that puts people (themselves and others in danger). I think it is perfectly reasonable the city to require a permit for marches and other forms of protest that are designed to make use of public property in some way other than the property is intended to be used. Parks, on the other hand, should be available to protesters to use without any type of permission slip. Camping is something of a grey area, but I don't really see anything wrong with it. I would like to see parks that are well lit and open 24 hrs, but it is easier to close them at late hours to reduce the potential for criminal activity. And because homeless people will live there. Generally, homeless people occupying public parks should be understood as a symptom, and some sort of institution, be it charity, church, or government should step in to assist. I do think a protest gives up some of its legitimacy once it resorts to crime, but I also understand that it is sometimes necessary to do so in order to prove how serious you are, to show that whatever the cause it is greater than one individual, etc. OWS IMHO though doesn't seem to be showing why they are willing to put themselves on the line. Is it just to maintain their occupation? To prove the "99%" stands arm-in-arm in solidarity? It is not as if they are demanding we pull out of Vietnam, they are just demanding the right to occupy a public park. Everything else is a little fuzzy.

This, is how you appeal to Non-Atheists by McJudgersonin atheism

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And I was able to somehow get you worked up enough to call me an "asshole", even after you took such a moral stand against me for calling mleeeeeee a "dickhead", so I'm satisfied as well.

This, is how you appeal to Non-Atheists by McJudgersonin atheism

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Alright well I've now spent a good five minutes looking for the quote online, and while I was able to find it in various places with attribution to Aurelius, I did not find any specific citations regarding any published works from which it may have originated. Therefore, the origin of this phenomenon, or, the source of this quote, remains unknown as far as I can tell. The potential misquote or misattribution of the quote is possible, but it is also possible that we simply don't know where the quote came from. Is it possible somebody intentionally attributed this quote to Aurelius? Sure. But I don't really care to put any more time into it than it takes for me to make a bowel movement. And I checked, there were no purple unicorns in the bowl before I flushed (but to be fair, if they were flying ass unicorns, they may have flown away before I was able to detect them).

This, is how you appeal to Non-Atheists by McJudgersonin atheism

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm not really good at logic, but is "flying fucking purple ass unicorns" some type of metaphor for a man made of straw?

This, is how you appeal to Non-Atheists by McJudgersonin atheism

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Look, the very first thing he does is tell you the text, The Meditations (and includes the version and translation), from which he has read. He then clearly indicates that he is stating an opinion in (as you called it) "wishy washy" language that includes terms like "seems", "pretty consistent", "maybe", etc. Also, any reasonable person should be able to infer from the disclaimer "without looking that up" that the following commentary was not intended to referenced for scholarly publications. The fact random people on the Internet upvoted the comment to the tune of 60+ points does not oblige him to go back and provide citations for his opinion. In what world do you live in where someone who happens to own a book and says they "know a bit about" a random subject has "credentials"?

Generally speaking, asking people to [cite] their opinions rather than offering a counter opinion is a dickheadish thing to do. I could go through reddit all day dropping [citation needed]s all over the place (if I wanted to be a dickhead), but instead I offer my own opinion and continue to reply "deep into ... stupid thread[s]" because I am more concerned with actually engaging in pointed debate than I am with trolling comments that get top voted.

If you are so concerned about the validity of mrBWB's comment, just go reference the text yourself. Also, fuck basic courtesy.

The single most badass self-portrait ever taken by FOR_SClENCEin pics

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

There is no "self" in this portrait.

This, is how you appeal to Non-Atheists by McJudgersonin atheism

[–]THEskinOFaROBOT 0 points1 point ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well, it is not immoral to call a dickhead a "dickhead". I really don't care whether or not it is nice, because truth trumps politics.

view more: next