ITT we condemn the built-in cultural assumptions of the poster above us (40)

1 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5256 13:15

Not that I actually endorse moral relativism.

2 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5256 13:21

>>1 thinks we care about what he endorses

3 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5256 13:29

>>2 can't even read the instructions in the thread. Are all Americans this dumb?

4 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5256 14:39

>>3 thinks DQN even gets up at 06:21
he also is unaware that his degenerate Western individualism has no place in the Islamic UK

5 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5256 20:15

>>4, that's a rather bold claim you are making regarding every member of the Elitist Superstructure. You need to rid yourself of your tendency to make sweeping generalizations. Do you know what happens when people are free to make them without any concern for reality? Well, just look at Hitler.

6 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 00:11

>>5 has no conception of Godwin's Law and needs to LURK MOAR.

7 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 00:41

>>6 failed to study the traditions of Usenet before tipping his toe into the world wide interwibble. I am therefore killfiling his entire newsserver.

8 Name: （ ´_⊃｀） : 1993-09-5257 04:37

>>6 and >>7 don't realize that on anonymous message boards, Godwin's Law works in reverse -- as a thread continues, teh N-word becomes more likely to be used.

9 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 15:39

>>8 's attempted sensitivity to issues of racial discrimination is appreciated, but simply bringing up "the N-word" is insensitive in itself and puts these issues in the spotlight where they bring up painful memories for those who actually lived through times where such terms were common parlance.

10 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 17:02

u dumb >>9 cuz we r callin each other nigga all time & were cool with dat

11 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 17:03

>>9
Your casual "spotlight" analogy serves to remind those people less fortunate than you of the life they are missing. Not everybody lives the glam lifestyle.

12 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 17:04

Not that I expect you to know the customs of discussion boards, but you are supposed to reply to the last poster, >>11, not to someone else.

13 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 17:04

>>10 should refrain from attempting any form of criticism of his economic and intellectual superiors and should stick to "hanging" with his "niggas" in the "hood".

14 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 17:05

HOLY SHIT DQN IS BUSY. WTF.

15 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 17:13

( ・-・) Wow, I seem to have inadvertently derailed another thread.

16 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5257 17:17

<　｀∀´> Well, never mind that, then, how about we discuss the greatness of Corea?

17 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5258 01:03

>>16 How about you stay the hell away from my dog?

18 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5258 21:26

Fido is not your sexual property >>17, if he wants to hump Coreans that's his decision

19 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5261 09:05

<　｀∀´> you think I consenting? you deny again the violation of Corea

20 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5261 11:52

Why are the Koreans so dumb they can't even write the name of their own country? Are their schools so horrible they can't even afford English teachers who have learned the language from native speakers?

21 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5261 15:15

You imply that the speech-disabled are not valid language users and equate muteness with stupidity.

22 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5268 20:13

what's wrong with being stupid, fuck-face?

23 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5269 05:59

what's wrong with being fuck-faced, stupid?

24 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5269 14:47

what's so fuck-faced about being wrong, prime-number poster-boy?

25 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5272 04:55

what's so prime about numbering poster-boys, wrong-number-face-fuck?

26 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5273 23:39

what poster fucked numbers of boys in their prime about-face stand-at-ease stand-easy fall-out 0900 hours quick-march all-clear all-quiet-on-the-western-front sergeant-major sir?

27 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5274 16:34

>>26 broke the thread. I can't even parse that. I tried to run it through Babelfish but all that came out was "fuckhead."

28 Name: （　・∀・）　 : 1993-09-5275 23:35

'The strength of the thread does not reside in the fact that some one fibre runs through its whole length, but in the overlapping of many fibres.'[1]

[1] Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations

Unlike Wittgenstein (and, apparently, unlike >>26). >>27 uncritically adopts a prevalent cultural assumption that every proposition has to have a definite meaning.

29 This post sucked.

30 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8616 23:35

Can't find a good meme to perpetuate.

31 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8617 01:49

>>30
Why can't you just have an original thought for once?

32 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8617 03:28

>>31
Here you go again with your goddamn "original thought" fetish. Just give it a rest already.

33 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8617 17:41

>>32
Here you go again with your goddamn "Here you go again with your goddamn "original thought" fetish. Just give it a rest already." fetish. Just give it a rest already.

34 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8617 18:28

>>33
Here you go again with your goddamn "recursive parroting" fetish. Just give it a rest already.

35 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8617 19:28

penis

36 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8617 23:21

>>35
Why not vagina?

37 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8618 01:11

>>36
Why so heteronormative?

38 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8622 10:56

>>37 did you just assume xyr gender?

39 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8625 18:18

>>38
My pronouns are I, me, and myself, you pre-singularity cretin.

40 Name: (*ﾟーﾟ) : 1993-09-8626 17:45

You just had to be one of those people who read Epimenides' paradox and took it seriously, eh.

Return Entire thread Last 50 posts
Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...
Verification: