Shuruia

VIP
  • Content count

    526
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Everything posted by Shuruia

  1. If throwing shade (your usual mechanism of defence) which contradicts what you've said about me in the past is your response to my request for constructive alternatives, then I rest my case.
  2. That's why the pressure is on with this revamp to make them active. Roy made it clear that inactivity and such will no longer be tolerated. Except that they do. Or was the recent motion to gut the CA team of the inactives just a prank by Roy? Speaking of ego boosts... I won't speak for the others, but you are making interesting observations for a community s̶t̶o̶n̶e̶r̶ advisor that carried a notorious reputation for struggling to hold simple conversations. Admittedly, I have a slight fondness for seeing you make a post like this. It seems almost like a form of long-awaited catharsis for you. Rather strange how a single post can serve to be your nail in the coffin for whatever degree of respect you had for a whole community, though. Apparently the community is at fault. Outside of gutting the CA team of inactivity (which is already in motion), what alternatives would you propose?
  3. Is it wise to make assumptions of the company's internal culture simply from the interview process alone? I know that first impressions are important, but still... If he still has time, he could ask for a tour of the work areas (if these particular companies allow for it; I know that some do for applicants they're willing to accept) to get a better feel for the internal culture. I realise that this is probably unlikely since he only has a couple of days left. If I were in this situation, I think I would choose the second company. Even if he wants to move away from that company later, the higher pay that they are offering gives him a larger safety net to fall back on. There is something to be said for the comfort that financial security can bring you.
  4. I can see where you're coming from, but it's an accurate analogy from @Black. No one is going to argue with the notion that the vast majority of time and effort that goes into GFL comes from Roy. GFL is a machine, and the money is used to maintain said machine. Would it not be fair to say that Roy is the most vital component of this machine? There is no need for a moral question to be posed here. Most of the truly well-established members of GFL aren't going to have a problem with Roy using at least a portion of the PayPal funds, which is a completely fair standpoint. Roy is obviously going to have a different perspective on that standpoint since, in his mind, it's going to be a considerable volume of community funds that are going solely to his own benefit. Roy isn't unique in this; people just naturally hate to feel like a burden to others. With this in mind, I still think it's good that there's a separate fund that goes towards Roy's well-being. Besides the implications that the public would infer from Roy taking the community funds for his own benefit, it means that Roy can sleep just a little more soundly at night with the knowledge that he doesn't have to use community funds to keep him healthy. One can hardly judge Roy in either scenario. After all, this isn't just for the betterment of an online community. It's for the betterment of a human being.
  5. Started playing on the TF2Ware server we had back in mid-2011. I only started using the forums towards the later months of that year.
  6. Well, let me know what you think of the first F/SN Heaven's Feel movie when you get the chance. I'm going to watch it as soon as I can.
  7. My last dog died on the same day that I was demoted a few months ago. I can't answer the second question of the poll without stretching the truth a tad on the first question. Sorry about that. Cats have their appeal, but I'll always prefer dogs.
  8. If you're lucky, it'll be more of a "Heyyy, Vsauce. Michael here."
  9. In addition to the Monogatari series, you people really need to watch Katanagatari.
  10. I realise that this must sound strange coming from me of all people, but I hope that this is resolved for you as quickly as possible. I always found it strange that you weren't in a hurry to have this condition treated as soon as possible, but it's better late than never. Especially with circumstances such as this, you shouldn't be afraid to take regular breaks from GFL. Directors, division leaders, server managers; they all remain to keep the machine running, after all. You can afford to do this.
  11. Make your prisoners tell jokes if they want to pay bail.
  12. Can you blame him? This post is a train wreck.
  13. Looks like life dealt you a bad stroke today. GFL's staff are typically very respectful towards such unforeseen circumstances, so feel free to spend as much time as you need away from GFL. Thank you for telling us.
  14. I am going to become the immortal dictator of a fascist empire for the sole purpose of outlawing pineapple on pizza.
  15. To clarify, I said that arresting someone for whatever reason automatically places a warrant on them; no warrant request is necessary by the cops. It's up to the cops whether or not they want to act on that warrant. It doesn't make sense to search the house of someone you arrested for carjacking, but it WOULD make sense if you arrested them for something such as selling oil.
  16. Let's see how far I can expand the subject. Given that Yahweh is the judge, jury and executioner for any and all sins (many of which could be considered as "sins" for entirely arbitrary and nonsensical reasons), it presents a rather damning problem. Granting humans free will is all well and good, and it's even better if humans use this free will to do good for their fellow man. Now, what if humans set out to do good in a manner in which Yahweh would disagree? They could make the choice to do what they feel is the right thing, but they have faith that an omnipotent force is breathing down their neck to damn them for all eternity, just because this omnipotent force told its followers to write down some incredibly arbitrary rules that would be obsolete within a millennium or two. Is that free will? Yes, but it's a very twisted form of free will. It's the equivalent of having someone hold you at gunpoint and telling you what to do; you could make the choice to not do what the gunman commands, but a smart person (especially in the presence of a danger that is vastly more obvious than a fairy tale figure) would naturally be inclined to avoid those bullet wounds. That's no longer free will at that point, but rather survival instinct. In other words, people have faith because they're afraid of the consequences of what will happen to them if their faith begins to falter for whatever reason. I used to fear your God as well. My fear was strong, and I was strongly Catholic as a result. I constantly had to do checks and balances in my head, but for all the wrong reasons. Instead of thinking "Is this the right thing to do? Will I harm others for doing this?", I instead had to think "Will God punish me for this? Will I go to Hell for this?". Luckily, I learned to stop fearing gods since I figured out that religion is an ethnic construct. Religion for the vast majority of people is decided for them based on their nation of origin, as most people don't actively make the decision to follow a particular religion because they prefer it over the other; they only adhere to the religion that they've been brought up with since it's convenient. I've also heard the argument that the fundamental statutes a deity sets for you are for the purpose of "persuading" humans to do good (or what Yahweh thinks is good in this case) through rule of fear. The ends justify the means, in other words. Well, that's a lot of hoops to jump through just to minimise the damage of free will, isn't it? It would mean that religion and all of the rules that come with it are essentially a soft leash on humanity's whims. So we still have free will, but there's a cap on how much free will we can have before certain dangerous thoughts are had. I don't like that. In fact, I find the very notion insulting to the human race. We can grow and be good to each other without some old dusty book. I suppose I should give biblical free will some credit, though. After all, it can allow the best Christians to cherry-pick which rules from the Bible are relevant to modern society, which rules are obsolete to modern society, and which rules are the ones that you shout at the worst Christians for "misinterpreting". "usually" If God is omnipotent, then one can logically assume that he is tireless. In other words, God will never tire (physically or otherwise) of his methods or handiwork, as to suggest otherwise would mean that he is not omnipotent. If God is omnibenevolent, then one can logically assume that he is a perpetual force for good. In other words, God will always have his best intentions and our best interests at heart, as to suggest otherwise would mean that he is not omnibenevolent. So if God "usually" lets things go naturally, what are the exceptions? Why does he, in his apparent infinite power and kindness, allow these certain exceptions? That's a rhetorical question; I already know that you can't accurately answer that question due to you already being rooted in the belief that we cannot hope to understand how such a higher being operates. This is a higher being that we cannot understand, as we have been created by said higher being to assume a form that cannot readily comprehend the higher being or its ideals. Why is that? Why would we not be born with the knowledge so that we can make the choice whether or not to adhere to these ideals that we'd already have knowledge of? The concept of free will would still be there, but with a lot less messy cases of something being "lost in translation" in scripture or teachings. To pose an alternative question, I want to ask why you would put so much faith and love into a being that you admit to being beyond our comprehension. If this being is vastly beyond our comprehension, isn't it somewhat arrogant to simply assume that this being has our best interests at heart? Let's assume that a higher being (not necessarily Yahweh) does exist. It could be good, it could be evil, or it simply could be completely indifferent to our existence. How do you figure out which one it is? Is it because it can seemingly communicate incredibly specific ideals to people to transcribe into a holy book, hence making the deity an arbitrary secret keeper? Or is it because you feel as though you should "love" this being out of fear of what you think it's going to do to you if you don't? Yes, but I know you already understand that this cuts both ways. One bad day has equal potential to make someone learn a valuable lesson and turn over a new leaf, or to burn down the forest that leaf came from because they have nothing to lose anymore. I can see the benefit, though. If I were to pretend to be a god (I have to think like one when I write for certain characters in my literary project, after all), I would let a touch of chaos loose every now and then to remind humans how to be kind to each other in times of strife. Of course, I imagine I wouldn't make for the most benevolent god, so it'd only be to balance out some of the less savoury things that I'd do.
  17. Spelling difference: theater vs theatre (@Roy @Shiny) Phonetic difference: garage /gah-raj/ vs garage /gah-ridge/ (@Charmy)
  18. Record some full matches for us! Our Grandmaster players would love to watch them and give you pointers.
  19. This is terrorism. You are a terrorist.
  20. If you're using a pistol as a vigilante, you're doing it wrong anyway. Buy yourself a rifle (preferably the M82) and glue yourself to the hotel next to the fountain. Just be prepared to state your KRs very often and you're good to go.
  21. Yes, this could work just as well. To our average forum user, hiding posts is essentially the same as deleting them anyway.
  22. Aye, that was (and remains) a problem. The alternative solution that I was going to implement before I was demoted was to write new guidelines for the CAs on which posts should simply be deleted, and which posts should be hidden/trash binned. It seemed as though CAs felt obliged to hide posts no matter what since deleting posts is taboo. That was just the culture that came to be accepted, so writing a hard rule on what to delete and what to hide seemed fair. Really though, it's just a lot more efficient to let people delete their own posts.