i think theyre elo hell in high ranks but if your a low rank you're just bad
Nub_Danish
| Account Details | |
|---|---|
| SteamID64 | 76561198046954825 |
| SteamID3 | [U:1:86689097] |
| SteamID32 | STEAM_0:1:43344548 |
| Country | Canada |
| Signed Up | July 24, 2013 |
| Last Posted | April 21, 2021 at 11:36 PM |
| Posts | 682 (0.2 per day) |
| Game Settings | |
|---|---|
| In-game Sensitivity | |
| Windows Sensitivity | |
| Raw Input | |
DPI |
|
Resolution |
|
Refresh Rate |
|
| Hardware Peripherals | |
|---|---|
| Mouse | |
| Keyboard | |
| Mousepad | |
| Headphones | |
| Monitor | |
#6
Important question
in
TF2 General Discussion
corsahttp://tf2db.github.io/tf2database/records.html
the real question we should be asking is who let skeez get a perfect game and what are we gonna do to them
posted about 7 years ago
#7
Where do you work?
in
Off Topic
matt-i work at chipotle and i always give extra guac for free
say goodbye to your job my dude
posted about 7 years ago
#97
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
pine4ppleShould be able to say anything you want. As long as you apologize afterwards.
if you have to apologize its not really free speech
posted about 7 years ago
#93
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
rocketslayreading through the bill I can't see how it forces you to ask people what their gender is
the bill basically adds discrimination based on sexual orientation (which it never says pronoun usage even constitutes) and states that a crime committed against a transgender person can be classed as a hate crime
I mean I guess if you think that transgender people will sue you for using the wrong pronoun then ok but this bill has a different connotation
getting sued for hate speech is already a thing in canada if the bill adds discrimination based on sexual orientation misgendering someone could be considered hate speech
the issue is mostly that hate speech laws are so openly worded that pretty much anything said in regards to a protected group could possibly be construed as hate speech
posted about 7 years ago
#1017
ESEA-IM S23 Happenings/Discussion
in
TF2 General Discussion
i think ur underated mustard
posted about 7 years ago
#90
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
rocketslayNub_Danishniteasking the majority of people to completely altar the way they interact with each other for 0.006 percent of the population is ludicrousNub_Danishso because 1 in 15,000 people could be be somewhere between male and female everyone should be able to self identify as whatever gender they make up for themselves. its ridiculous to ask for places to make an option for other when only 1 in 15000 people would be that other
how about the 1 in 8 people who are black, should there be no possible option for them? how about the 1 in 50 people who are jewish, should there be no possible option for them? if 1 in 100 people identified outside of their own gender do you think it would be acceptable? how about 1 in 1000? like at what arbitrary point in your brain is it acceptable to start ignoring a minority group of people based on their portion of the population?
by what arbitrary point in your brain is it okay to ignore a group of people based on their portion of the population? basically when they become statistically irrelevant it becomes a waste of time and resources
just curious as to how you think this will "completely alter" the way you interact with other people
you can't say that the pronoun thing is not a big deal and also say that this affects straight people a ton
if you call someone who identifies as a female sir because your trying to be polite and you have to go to court for a hate crime because you misgendered someone it is completely altering your life
posted about 8 years ago
#88
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
niteNub_Danishso because 1 in 15,000 people could be be somewhere between male and female everyone should be able to self identify as whatever gender they make up for themselves. its ridiculous to ask for places to make an option for other when only 1 in 15000 people would be that other
how about the 1 in 8 people who are black, should there be no possible option for them? how about the 1 in 50 people who are jewish, should there be no possible option for them? if 1 in 100 people identified outside of their own gender do you think it would be acceptable? how about 1 in 1000? like at what arbitrary point in your brain is it acceptable to start ignoring a minority group of people based on their portion of the population?
asking the majority of people to completely altar the way they interact with each other for 0.006 percent of the population is ludicrous
by what arbitrary point in your brain is it okay to ignore a group of people based on their portion of the population? basically when they become statistically irrelevant it becomes a waste of time and resources
posted about 8 years ago
#75
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
>A meme that's meant to make fun of transgender people and suggest that identifying as anything but what you're born as is ridiculous. I see no problem making a reply to it.
whymeoGeel9I don't think anyone is arguing that transgender people don't exist. There's a difference between being a man in a woman's body (or vice versa) and insisting that there's uncountable possible gender identities and there must be specific pronouns (and people must use these pronouns) for each one
There is also some scientific evidence to show that transgender people who do not identify as either male or female (but instead anywhere in between) are also valid:
"The main problem with a strong dichotomy is that there are intermediate cases that push the limits and ask us to figure out exactly where the dividing line is between males and females,” biology sex expert Arthur Arnold at the University of California, Los Angeles, told Nature. “And that's often a very difficult problem, because sex can be defined a number of ways.”
The scientists discovered the XX and XY cells that differentiate between genders can actually behave in different ways. When scientists took a closer look, they found not all people have cells that contain the same set of genes. Instead, it’s more like a mosaic of different unevenly divided sex cells, which biologists have taken to calling “mosaicism.” Although it’s a rare condition that only affects about 1 in 15,000 people, it still leaves an unidentified population of society outside of the familiar dichotomy."
Taken from: http://www.medicaldaily.com/challenging-gender-identity-biologists-say-gender-expands-across-spectrum-rather-323956
Tsarbucks It's a meme...
A meme that's meant to make fun of transgender people and suggest that identifying as anything but what you're born as is ridiculous. I see no problem making a reply to it.
so because 1 in 15,000 people could be be somewhere between male and female everyone should be able to self identify as whatever gender they make up for themselves. its ridiculous to ask for places to make an option for other when only 1 in 15000 people would be that other
posted about 8 years ago
#70
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
whymeoTino_@Whymeo
I gotta ask this because I legit have no idea, but because I am the only one you pointed out in your post are you saying that I dislike trans or any other people and think that they should have no protection or something? I just want to know so I can keep track of who is calling me a transphobe or bigot at any one time...
Anyways I think you missed the point of my post, Things like race are very easy to see and separate for people there are prominent features on people so you can tell them apart, you can tell that someones from the US is different from someone that comes from India, this is easy to do for the most part. My point was that something that is subjective like gender or whatever cannot be seen or defined easily. This is a issue, because if you start mandating that people refer to X, Y or Z as possibly X, Y or Z but they also might be FA, AH or AFGD it really fucks with stuff because you have no idea. Laws need firm guidelines that everyone can follow, that's what a law is. Furthermore the fact that if you don't call a X who actually wants to be a AH, AH, its not something like "Ohh can you change it for me" as it can literally become "I am going sue you for $1,000,000 because you disrespected me. How the fuck does that make ANY logical sense at all? Like I literally don't get it.
Also as I have stated multiple times the bill that is currently being passed is fine, there are no issues with it and it is something that is already enacted in almost all of the provinces in Canada. The issue with the bill is what comes after it, the bills that are currently only provincial bills in places like Ontario are VERY VERY vague, the have no solid definition as to what the actual fuck they are or what they mean. This is the issue, its not about a single bill its about the president that is being set.
No, I was talking about people who use "free speech" arguments in general to make sure trans people don't get discrimination laws protecting them. Thank you for explaining your position however, I have no knowledge about local bills and if they are potentially too vague or not. I'm glad to hear you're fine with the currently passed bill, but I disagree that any bad precedent is being set.
you say you have no knowledge of the local bill so how do you know a precedent isnt being set
posted about 8 years ago
#67
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
whymeogoodboyDon't be such a thick cunt, the bill only extends existing laws against discrimination by recognising discrimination on the basis of gender identity/expression. It's already illegal to discriminate based on skin colour, age, weight, hetero/homosexual etc., and this bill would allow taking an employer to court if you can prove they are discriminating based on your gender identification. It would also allow criminal prosecution in cases where someone is attacked for identifying as a certain gender, or if someone puts out flyers telling people to harm people based on their gender identity; in that sense, it's very close to the laws protecting homosexual people.
It's nowhere suggested that using the wrong pronouns would become a *criminal* offense. Seriously? You have to either be completely ignorant of law or simply baiting to write such bullshit.
Skimming over this thread it seems like most everyone is just ignoring this post. The only reply I noticed was:
Tino_It also has to do with use of said pronouns in contracts or business dealings. EG. If you go to a school and the school does not have your preferred pronoun as a option to use on the legal documents you can theoretically sue them for discrimination. And that is where this law get ridiculous, the law is no longer stating what cannot be said (in a racist or inflammatory matter) but it is stating what you must say for fear of upsetting someone. That is where the real issue with it is. As I said before, having laws in place to keep you from saying x or y to curtail hate is fine and needed. Having laws that tell you what to say on the other had is not. Its the difference between getting in trouble because you didn't hand in homework VS getting in trouble for handing in the homework, but its on a blue sheet of paper instead of green. Regardless of how correct the work is on the paper, or what you have done to get it in you are punished not because you didn't do it but because you didn't do it the preferred way. That't how preschool works not the real world.
Which is just...a mindbogglingly bad argument. Yeah, all the law is saying you can't discriminate trans people (non-binary included) and that fucking legal documents should properly represent various gender identities. I bet this is probably as simple as having an "other" option on paperwork and yet u guys are all getting angry about it lmao.
Here's what I think is actually going on: a large percentage of people don't like trans people so they hide behind things like "free speech" to argue against anything that extends discrimination laws to protect trans people as well. And that's fine, but actually come out and say that. Don't give me these bullshit "free speech" arguments when all ur really saying is "I don't like trans people and they shouldn't have equal protection against discrimination that other minorities have".
this is the same shit as left wing people repeatedly do you accuse people of hating trans people without evidence because they believe something
this is why trump won if you want people to come over to your side on issues stop accusing them of being racist or bigots etc it just makes them mad and blot you out
posted about 8 years ago
#49
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
eeeNub_Danish>what difference is there? Is the interpretation of "I'm going to hurt you" less valid than an interpretation of someone rejecting your core identity? This argument only works if you consider one type of threatening language more valid than another or don't consider rejection of someone's identity a threat.
rejecting someones core identity is not violence against them, whenever i decide i don't like someone i am not commiting violence against them by not liking them
your logic is ridiculous
Rejecting someone's identity is a form of dehumanization
if you don't consider that an active threat you're a bad person
(we already know you're a bad person but w/e)
you continuously try to use personal attacks against people who disagree with you on the forms
continue riding along your high horse you are a saint
i dont think u understand that by your logic if i were to say "i identify as whatever you want" and you dont go out of your way to be nice to me and call me by whatever i want, you are threatening me
laws against free speech are unnecessary there's already a punishment system in place for being an asshole you lose your job, friends etc if people think you're an asshole
if there were a professor so mean and nefarious abusing trans students by going "Why good evening sir" with a gleeful lil smile everyday because he knows they identify as a female you can bet he'd get in shit or even fired, and even if he weren't to get fired people would stop signing up for his class cuz hes an asshole and he'd lose his job that way.
posted about 8 years ago
#43
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
>what difference is there? Is the interpretation of "I'm going to hurt you" less valid than an interpretation of someone rejecting your core identity? This argument only works if you consider one type of threatening language more valid than another or don't consider rejection of someone's identity a threat.
rejecting someones core identity is not violence against them, whenever i decide i don't like someone i am not commiting violence against them by not liking them
your logic is ridiculous
posted about 8 years ago
#38
Dr. Jordan Peterson Debate
in
World Events
Enterimit's possible to think that both criminalizing incorrect speech is wrong and that this guy is a blowhard not worth paying attention to. you guys don't have to immediately latch on to every half-baked loudmouth who offers even the slightest resistance to """identity politics""".
all the overblown reaction to college liberals is such a waste of time—tumblr teens have no power over anyone but other tumblr teens. save your energy for more worthy causes.
they do have power considering some colleges and university require professors to give trigger warning, law students dont wanna learn about handling rape cases http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-rape-law
they have power
posted about 8 years ago