Slashdot Mirror


Heavy Metal and Emergent Behavior

You may think that moshing and disordered 2D gases don't have much in common but Jesse Silverberg of Cornell University contends otherwise. He says that mosh pits act just like disordered gases and people in circle pits act in an ordered vortex-like state. From the article: "Silverberg and co gathered their data by examining videos of mosh pits on You Tube... These crowds contain anything from 100 to 100,000 people. After correcting for camera shake and distortions in perspective, they used particle image velicometry techniques to measure the collective motion of moshers. What they discovered was that the speed distribution of moshers closely matches that of molecules in a 2D gas at equilibrium."

92 comments

  1. Who would've thought by jampola · · Score: 2

    A large group of people in a circle pit resembles a bunch of molecules circling? I'll be damned.

    1. Re:Who would've thought by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Funny

      A large group of people in a circle pit resembles a bunch of molecules circling? I'll be damned.

      Who'd have thought being a molecule in a disordered gas reaching equilibrium could be so much fun. It's a pity that many venues want to ban emergent behaviour.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    2. Re:Who would've thought by StripedCow · · Score: 5, Funny

      So physics is actually close to psychology, and not really a hard science.

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    3. Re:Who would've thought by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

      I'd mod you up anytime, anyway, anyhow as insightful and funny.
      Don't have points though.

    4. Re:Who would've thought by Razgorov+Prikazka · · Score: 0

      Obligatory XKCD reference....
      http://xkcd.com/435/

      --
      rm -rf --no-preserve-root / ...and let /dev/null sort them out...
    5. Re:Who would've thought by Shinobi · · Score: 2

      I was actually thinking "So, physicists only NOW catch up with psychology?".

      Psychology has used concepts from gas and particle physics for at least 40 years, and in many way follow the same rules: You can generalize a group, but an individual can only be statistically compared with the group traits and not specifically predicted.

    6. Re:Who would've thought by dwarfenhoschi · · Score: 1

      A large group of people in a circle pit resembles a bunch of molecules circling? I'll be damned.

      Who'd have thought being a molecule in a disordered gas reaching equilibrium could be so much fun. It's a pity that many venues want to ban emergent behaviour.

      Good Thing Im in Germany...no sign of anyone wanting to ban natural mosh emergence just yet :D

    7. Re:Who would've thought by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      This is the entire premise of Asimov's Foundation series. A good read.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    8. Re:Who would've thought by Shinobi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've read them all.

      I know it was suggested early, but it wasn't until the 60's that people actually figured out how to actually make it useful within mathematical psychology, i.e what concepts could be used, which ones needed to be stripped, and what concepts that needed to be put in.

    9. Re:Who would've thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Replace "Obligatory" by "I'm an unfunny idiot and I don't know what to say at all, so I'll just link something someone else wrote"

    10. Re:Who would've thought by Basje · · Score: 1

      Wacken Open Air, a German festival and one of the largest metal festivals in the world, banned circle pits in 2010. Luckily they recanted. I'm looking forward to this year's edition.

      --
      the pun is mightier than the sword
    11. Re:Who would've thought by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      That's Impossible! you see, molecules are brainless items while metal heads are... uhm... nevermind.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    12. Re:Who would've thought by hazah · · Score: 1

      It's not as catchy.

    13. Re:Who would've thought by gr8dude · · Score: 1

      This is a conclusion reached by Anatol Rapoport, a fellow who was studying these things (he is the author of tit-for-tat, among other things). He provides some examples in his book "Certainties and doubts", which is a very interesting read. Here is a relevant excerpt (this is a public album, you don't need a Facebook account to see the pics)

  2. IG Nobel! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A sure candidate.

  3. Weird by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My experience with smaller mosh pits (guess: up to 50 headbangers) indicates a different pattern, more like a sloshing wave. Most people move in one direction until they get near the edge and then go back.
    Is this a size thing? The mosh pits analyzed in this story are bigger. Changes that the behavior?

    --
    Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    1. Re:Weird by FauxReal · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the fun of trying to go the opposite direction with a few friends in the smaller pits. But yeah in the bigger ones the sheer amount of people carries a lot of momentum.

    2. Re:Weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not much headbangers in the mosh pits that I've seen.

      And I think it's safe to say that it's a size thing, yes.

    3. Re:Weird by Antipater · · Score: 1
      My guess is it depends on the number of people present, the size of the venue, and some average measure of how much energy the band imparts to the audience.

      Although wait...that sounds familiar somehow.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    4. Re:Weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't be a PerV=NeRT.

    5. Re:Weird by quarterbuck · · Score: 1

      That's what I thought too.
      But I guess this has something to do with speed of information travel. In gases speed of sound is a barrier to information travel - if a disturbance is slower than speed of sound, it is of the form we can easily identify. Particles ahead of the object "know" that a disturbance is coming and slowly get out of the way, similar to an oar in water causing waves ahead of it.
      If it is supersonic though, there is no warning ahead. You cannot hear a SuperSonic aircraft before it gets to you.
      I think in the case you described , waves from the back act like super-sonic wave (or wave at speed of information travel) while the reflection wave is slower because people can see what is in front of them.

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    6. Re:Weird by Graydyn+Young · · Score: 1

      Mosh pits also vary a lot based on musical style. For example the pit in front of a hardcore band is going to have more space between individuals, and more velocity per individual. Music in the hard rock genre is going to have pits that are more squished together but less violent. Lamb of God even has their special Wall of Death move that again changes the whole scenario.

  4. Physicists by kid-noodle · · Score: 5, Funny

    Consider a spherical heavy metal fan..

    --
    fortune -o
    1. Re:Physicists by inamorty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Consider a spherical heavy metal fan..

      Only if he's in a vacuum.

    2. Re:Physicists by MadKeithV · · Score: 5, Funny

      Consider a spherical heavy metal fan..

      Only if he's in a vacuum.

      Metalheads operate in a social vacuum.

    3. Re:Physicists by lesincompetent · · Score: 5, Funny

      Phisicists operate in a social vacuum, not metalheads. You are clearly not one of them.

    4. Re:Physicists by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I'm not a physicist.

    5. Re:Physicists by lesincompetent · · Score: 1

      Is it me or this place is full of people always ready to exploit the ambiguity of one's expressions?

    6. Re:Physicists by MadKeithV · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes.

    7. Re:Physicists by Barryke · · Score: 1

      You are clearly not one of them.

      --
      Hivemind harvest in progress..
    8. Re:Physicists by garaged · · Score: 1

      or darkly, not one of them indeed

      --
      I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
    9. Re:Physicists by lesincompetent · · Score: 1

      Please stop! You're hurting my brain!

    10. Re:Physicists by hamburger+lady · · Score: 1

      consider a cylindrical heavy metal fan, marked about the periphery with the numbers 1 to 11.

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
    11. Re:Physicists by Barryke · · Score: 1

      Thats good news. You have one.

      --
      Hivemind harvest in progress..
  5. A Balanced Universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is always order in chaos!

  6. General phenomena, NKS by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 5, Informative

    You might be interested in new kind of science, where Stephen Wolfram argues that fluid (and gas) movement is a general pehonomena, which can be replicated using only very basic rules. And therefore must occur in very broad range of materials, regardless of their underlying precise rules. And he is right. I am no surprised that this also applies to heavy metal crowds.

    --
    #
    #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
    #
    1. Re:General phenomena, NKS by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's a pity that fluid flow itself needs more than a few basic rules to model.

    2. Re:General phenomena, NKS by garaged · · Score: 1

      you clearly have never performed theoretical science

      --
      I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
    3. Re:General phenomena, NKS by Common+Joe · · Score: 1

      On page 381, paragraphs 4 and 5, it says that randomness seen in fluid (and gas) movement is almost always generated by the internal system itself and not set by initial conditions. This could have implications on current theories of the big bang which assumes what we see in the universe is based from initial conditions.

      Sorry I don't have an exact quote, but wolframscience didn't make it easy to copy the relevant text over and I got too lazy to do anything else about it.

  7. Join the legion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our heavy metal overlords, may their head-banging always strike true

    1. Re:Join the legion by mrbester · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I'd like to be in the middle of a 100,000 strong mosh. I can hold my own with the best of them but the potential for serious injury is too high.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  8. Airheads! I knew it all along! by fantomas · · Score: 2

    "the speed distribution of moshers closely matches that of molecules in a 2D gas at equilibrium"

    I knew all along that metal fans were all airheads, now proven by science!

    1. Re:Airheads! I knew it all along! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's merely a hypothesis at this point; proof may or may not be forthcoming.

      On the plus side, you have managed to prove that you are a bigot - no science necessary. Impressive.

    2. Re:Airheads! I knew it all along! by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

      A big fat "whoosh", considering the OP's username is "fantomas" ;-)

  9. Re:Brainless matter by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

    It also explains Mathcore.

  10. Peer review...... by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 5, Funny

    How music fans act as molecules.

    Headbangers + applied energy (awesome riffs & volume) fill a volume as individual particles, do not form products, expand the volume of their "container" as pressure increases and dissipate when applied energy source is removed.

    Country line dancers (extremely soluble in ethanol) + applied energy (twangy vocals and guitars + ethanol) enter solution as a binary compound, form complex molecules and then dissipate as binary compounds (not necessarily with the original conjugate species). However, once the molarity of ethanol diminishes, these binary compounds dissolve and seek higher concentrations of ethanol often showing an affinity for elements with a higher electronegativity (redneck factor). It must be noted that country line dancers become highly volatile for no known reason(s) regardless of the concentration of the ethanol solution.

    If you argue with me, how about we turn this into a peer reviewed article right here on slashdot!

    1. Re:Peer review...... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Do ravers next! :D

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:Peer review...... by moeinvt · · Score: 1

      I hypothesize that ravers would exhibit more wave-like properties.

    3. Re:Peer review...... by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ravers require a catalyst to lower the activation energy. Many effective catalysts are known to exist, but pure ones are desired to eliminate undesired results. So, ravers + activation energy (complex audio range frequencies in the presence of various light sources), begin to exhibit unexplainable quantum effects. These quantum effects vary significantly within the sample. Although some elements may seem to have the required energy and orientation to effectively bond, particle proximity seems sufficient enough to observe results such as random and vivid kaleidoscoping fractal patterns. This results in other molecules, not necessarily in direct contact, adopting similar properties which either homogenize or further break apart to reveal quarks that allow even more complex reactions to occur. Periodically, the wrong combination of reaction mechanisms can result in short-term irreversible immediate and direct return to the pre-catalyzing state.

      Peer reviews of such reactions are difficult because no experiment has been shown to be repeatable - the results, although similar, are never the same.

      However, it must be noted that certain mixtures of catalysts have demonstrated long term and sometimes irreversible excitation - even when removed from the reaction vessel and isolated in a clinical setting.

      Including the reactions mentioned in my earlier post, raver reactions appear to have the least destructive effect on the environment. In correlation to theories of the origins of the universe the big bang theory has greater merit. However, unraveling raver reactions seems to support the possibility of the steady state theory being a premonition of what may soon develop. Politicians and judges have fought hard to control access to the required catalysts to prove such a possibility, and many research proposals are continually denied for illusory reasons. Perhaps they are right in their motives because if you are trying to qualify and quantify raver reactions, you are totally missing the point! Raver reactions exist of their own accord toward the extent of a continual BIG BANG; where no politicians or judges could exist.

    4. Re:Peer review...... by GonzoPhysicist · · Score: 1

      wouldn't line dancers act more like a crystalline lattice?

      --
      horror vacui
    5. Re:Peer review...... by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 1

      Hmmm.

      That's a good point! Perhaps my analogy refers more to square dancers.

      Yes, you are correct - the lattice structures do immediately alternate in form with respect to differences in twang.

      Thank you for your insight.

  11. Translation at work by Tagged_84 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This really flows well with the book I'm reading at the moment, The God Problem by Howard Bloom. This is an example of translation causing transformation, the movement of the gas molecules is a recruitment strategy that is dominate enough to cross between different, err things? The same pattern in the gas create a social/group activity when translated to humans. One of the examples given in the book outlines how bacterial colonies in Petri dishes spread out in fractal patterns just like those found in rocks.

    It's a fairly stretched out book, I originally started reading it for his theory of the shape of our universe, a bagel. In theory it replaces dark energy with gravity to explain the accelerated burst and subsequent slow down experienced by the early universe as well as the missing anti-matter. 250 pages in and it's covered the history of science while explaining how we miss what's right under our nose, such as the Egyptians making perfect right angles using the golden ratio and never discovering the concept of angles. Highly recommend it!

    1. Re:Translation at work by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 1

      his theory of the shape of our universe, a bagel

      Alright, back up a minute. In what sense is the shape of the universe like a bagel? If I assume you mean that spacetime is a 4D torus, then you not only have a non-zero Ricci scalar (curvature), which flatly contradicts a lot of experimental evidence, but you have a non-constant curvature throughout the universe, which would mean that spacetime is non-isotropic, which again (via Nöethers theorem) implies that conservation of mass and conservation of momentum are no longer laws of nature. I assume he has some pretty damned good explanations for this?

      --
      for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
    2. Re:Translation at work by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 1

      Having looked at the author more thoroughly, I've concluded that while he probably has some good insights into sociology and related things, he knows next to nothing about cosmology, quantum theory or modern physics at all. He goes ahead and bases his claim on knowing these fields on "having published on arxiv.org", which is trivial, since there is no peer review or anything required to get a paper on the arXiv. And then, when you look at said arXiv paper it is just a really convoluted attempt at a hidden variables explanation of quantum mechanics, which as Colbeck and Renners showed a few years ago is not a fruitful class of theories, since it doesn't really explain anything. It's about as scientific as Russel's teapot, or the invisible pink unicorn.

      --
      for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
  12. Holy Crap! This changes EVERYTHING! by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

    The particles are Sentient, AND listen to Metal!

  13. are you spherical? by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    I can only wonder if the stripedkau is also a spherical cow? How now, spherical cow,
    physical perfection, here and now!

  14. Re:Brainless matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wow, rely on stereotypes much? Not everyone who is in to Metal is empty headed. Some people actually just prefer the sound of grinding guitar and blast beats drums. Also, Anti-Intellectual? How exactly does musical preference infer that kind of stance?

  15. Cornell University? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As in "Chris Cornell"?

  16. Re:Brainless matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ditto. I was a long haired head banger back in the late 80's. Went on to get my MSEE. I still bang on my drums to Maiden, King Diamond, Kreator, etc..

  17. Re:Brainless matter by gtall · · Score: 1

    And math-metal and prog-metal are quite interesting and complex. The bands producing that stuff are quite creative. There are also a lot of excellent musicians in metal.

  18. Author has never been to a Slayer concert by ClassicASP · · Score: 1

    Remember that scene from the first Sherlock Holmes movie where he has those flies in a glass tube and he's plucking a violin?

    Perhaps Slayer is a more pure example of creating order out of chaos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yMwJ79IeHk

  19. Re:Holy Crap! This changes EVERYTHING! by gtall · · Score: 1

    Hell, "The Particles" ought to be the name of a heavy metal band.

  20. "Towards a quantum theory of moshing" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This will be my PhD

  21. Re:Brainless matter by Hatta · · Score: 2

    Not everyone who is in to Metal is empty headed.

    True, many smart people have bad taste.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  22. Hi, Heavy Metal fan here by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Informative

    s/Mosh Pit/Circle Pit/g;

    They're different things. A mosh pit is where folk charge from the edge to the centre, and is pretty disorganised. Typically you'll find this with Death Metal, Speed Metal, and other very fast beat genres where there is no discernable difference between, say, verse and chorus. Circle Pits are the phenomenom being investigated here, where they start moving in a fairly ordered vortex around the centre, before moving into the centre when the band "drops the bass", then moves back to the circle when there's a "lull" (comparitively).

    Hope this helps, science types.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Hi, Heavy Metal fan here by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Hi, old punk here: what You Kids These Days call "circle pits" we used to call "mosh pits", and what you call "mosh pits" we used to call "a bunch of jackasses who need to be taken out back and taught the error of their ways."

      [grumble]

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Hi, Heavy Metal fan here by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 1

      Dude, I remember when the Ramones debuted on SHA NA NA and "fight club" was the status-quo - at home, after school, during class, in the principals office, wherever! Calling somebody puss-puss these days just makes them sad and run away to the grief counselors.

  23. Another one insulting from ignorance by dbIII · · Score: 2

    Instead you clearly have a very simplistic view of fluid flow. One very simple laminar flow experiment I saw in the 1980s needed a pipe the length of a reasonable sized University building to ensure that there wasn't turbulent flow at the outlet.

    1. Re:Another one insulting from ignorance by Antipater · · Score: 1
      A "very simple" laminar flow experiment used a 275mm diameter pipe?

      (entry length of 40m, a "reasonable-sized university building", Reynolds # of 2300 for laminar flow, Lentry/D=~=Re/16 gives D around 275mm)

      Or did I miss something? It's been a while since I did any fluid calcs.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    2. Re:Another one insulting from ignorance by GonzoPhysicist · · Score: 1

      Just because reality is complicated doesn't mean that the math of fluids (mostly Navier-Stokes) wouldn't apply to other fields. It may not be as universal as the wave equation, but being emergent from F=ma and some basic conservation laws I could see how it might correlate with other systems.

      --
      horror vacui
    3. Re:Another one insulting from ignorance by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Everyone can take their baggage and attach it to a different strawman. All I did is point out that fluid flow needs more than a few basic rules to model.

    4. Re:Another one insulting from ignorance by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Something like that, otherwise it's not simple flow. That rig actually had an analogue computer next to it that was adjusted to match the rig and provide an accurate mathematical model. These days you could do a similar job with a "neural net" instead of a pile of amplifiers patched together.
      Another example of why things are not so simple without even touching turbulence is supersonic flow - a subsonic nozzle goes in but a supersonic nozzle (eg. space shuttle main engine nozzles) goes out but both do the same thing - how weird is that?

    5. Re:Another one insulting from ignorance by garaged · · Score: 1

      Most of the time theoretical work is about making a pretty deep simplyfication of the actual problem... Even quantum chemistry does that...

      In other words, sorry for the bad joke!

      --
      I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
    6. Re:Another one insulting from ignorance by dbIII · · Score: 1

      NP, I didn't realise it was a joke. Being an engineer I've never really done any theoretical science, but I did get to play with various types of flow compressing metal powder using a gas gun in the 1990s while watching guys in next room do stuff with helium at mach 6.

  24. 100,000? by Sperbels · · Score: 1

    Where pray-tell did they find a 100,000 person mosh pit? Most pits I've seen have been more like 1-100 people.

    1. Re:100,000? by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Brazil? Rock in Rio draws like 10 million people over several days, wouldn't be surprising if single events in it drew 100K people.

    2. Re:100,000? by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      I still have trouble believing that number. 100k person in a moshpit sounds more like the biggest riot the earth has ever seen. Surely hundreds of people would be trampled and killed in such a pit.

    3. Re:100,000? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still have trouble believing that number. 100k person in a moshpit sounds more like the biggest riot the earth has ever seen. Surely hundreds of people would be trampled and killed in such a pit.

      Allegedly it happens a lot. It's just that no-one ever reports metalfans missing.

    4. Re:100,000? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      GP apparently doesn't know the difference between a mosh pit and an event.

      Given that fatalities can occur when single digits of thousands are crammed into a confined space and surging (Hillsborough (1989), Heysel (1985), Mecca (Every other year)) a 100k mosh pit would be a massacre.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:100,000? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love Parade in Germany recently.

      Guinness book of records likely holds some kind of record in numbers on biggest mosh pit.

  25. If that's the case... by AtomicBison · · Score: 0

    Then my metal comrades and I whipped up some awesome science last night at a Turisas show. I wonder if I can get a grant to incite mosh pits for the purpose of studying...

  26. Why is this not tagged 'Numb3ers'? by MikeTheGreat · · Score: 1

    I can see Charlie Epps explaining how they'll model the mosh pit as a disordered gas, with the in it behaving in an ordered vortex-like state, in order to find the location of the killer!

  27. Re:Brainless matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Smart people know there is no evidence of such things as "bad" or "good" tastes, just different tastes; such labels are mere social pretensions created by those whose insecurity is worn on their shirt sleeves. Right next to the snot stains.

  28. For "velicometry" read "velocimetry" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That typo had me puzzled for a bit.

  29. One thing all studies seem to agree on by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 1

    Disco still sucks.

    --
    Huh?
  30. And Most Crowd Distaters are not due to Stampedes by Diamonddavej · · Score: 3, Informative

    And this reminds me of the Crowd Quake. Most crowd disasters are not due to Stampedes, where mass panic breaks out and people rush headlong into a choke point and get crushed. Researchers looking into the Love Parade Disaster discovered a hitherto unrecognised crowd dynamical process that can kill people in large crows - the Crowd Quake.

    In normal crowds there's personal space between people, room to breath and move even a little bit. This personal space accommodates and cushions mass movement. However, at a critical point of density there's no personal space left and people are in full body contact. In this situation, mass movement efficiently transmits extreme forces through the crowd - the Crowd Quake. It's like changing a compressible gas into an incompressible solid, but people aren't incompressible. This is why crowd disasters happen so suddenly, it's like crystallisation from a gas.

    See: Crowd Disasters as Systemic Failures: Analysis of the Love Parade Disaster http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.1886

  31. Re:And Most Crowd Distaters are not due to Stamped by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    Stampede? I thought a stampede was when people get knocked down and other people, instead of helping them up, just step on them to get over to the exit. Get stepped on by a couple hundred people and you're going to suffer grievous damage.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  32. Re:Brainless matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess you prefer niggers shouting?

  33. Re:Holy Crap! This changes EVERYTHING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're joking, right? Emo faggot shit or pretentious electro twerps.