Use Gamemaker. I detected that you're not using Gamemaker. It'll make you more hip, and it offers extreme slowness. Why not use Gamemaker? There are an infinite amount of reasons that you should, and no reasons that you shouldn't.
Greetings, my friend. Why have you not returned to Gamemakerdom yet?
Use Gamemaker. Use it right now. Why not use Gamemaker. There is simply no reason to not use Gamemaker. Time to switch to Gamemaker. Why not make the switch to Gamemaker? There's no reason for you to not use Gamemaker. None at all.
I think you have a right to know this: every fiber of your being is exerting dangerously high magnitudes of Gamemakerlessnesses. You need to start using Gamemaker, friend.
What do you have against Gamemaker? Why aren't you using Gamemaker? Why not switch to Gamemaker? Gamemaker's great. There's nothing more relaxing and fun than using Gamemaker. Use Gamemaker.
Why not return to Gamemakerdom today? Is there some reason you're not returning to Gamemakerdom right this minuteness? You'd better return to it.
Something is terribly amiss, my friend. I've been observing this phenomenon for some time now, but... could it be that you're not using Gamemaker? I'm detecting that you're not using Gamemaker (as you should be doing).
Return to Gamemakerdom. Return to it right this minuteness. What on Earth are you waiting for? Return to Gamemakerdom.
Comparing the negative response to the idea of installing Twitter in a car to the hysterical comparison of such negative responses to the support of the TSA and the Patriot Act and strongly implying support of totalitarianism?
They're merely inconsistent. The logic is the same. "Surrender some freedom for security." The amount of freedom is irrelevant. Getting fondled at an airport, for instance, is much less severe than it could be. But some people pretend that because it's only a small loss of freedom that it isn't a bad thing. I disagree. And the reason I disagree is that people assume that everyone will abuse these features, and that's not necessarily true. I'm against collective punishment.
Neither of those. The truth is that Gamemaker reigns supreme over everything else. Gamemaker has no flaws, and it is a perfect language.
That's why you, a mere Gamemakerless ultimatum, must return to Gamemakerdom. How can you claim to be a programmer if you're not using Gamemaker? That's laughable at best, and intentionally deceptive at worst.
Yes. They get too emotional about casualties in the name of freedom and opt to restrict what other people are able to do. They cannot handle even a single loss, and they don't even realize that their 'solutions' will often not even solve the problem.
This is why some people support the TSA and the Patriot Act. "We must restrict everyone's rights in exchange for a bit of safety." It's just that there are different things that they want to sacrifice freedom for. In some cases, it's terrorism (restricting people's rights to "stop the terrorists" doesn't seem popular here). In some cases, it's children (I've noticed this is more popular here, especially when it comes to issues like child porn).
At what point is it acceptable for them to step in?
When the threat not only looks credible, but it's likely that you'll be able to carry it out.
The government has misinterpreted obvious jokes before. Threats that were not credible at all. All parties involved knew they were jokes, but since the government doesn't know the people and is an emotionless overlord, it took them seriously.
If a threat is not likely to be carried out, it's just a waste of taxpayer money (and an individual's freedom) to imprison them. They could be joking/emotional. Very possible with human beings.
Might as well defend the TSA if you want to defend against unlikely threats.
No, but you should have to! What if someone innocent (unlike you, you murderer) accidentally reads those books and gets offended? People have a right to not be offended, you know.
Please don't make it a hassle for people who want to view the content. Not for the children, and not for anyone else. This isn't necessary. We've lived without this, and somehow the world hasn't collapsed due to it yet.
This anti-sexuality nonsense has got to go. Even if a child does see the content, it will most likely not hurt them, anyway. I'd say ignorance is far more damaging.
go ahead and threaten to kill someone. then later say you were just being emotional or joking. tell us how that works out for you
Citing how the law is right now not isn't going to convince me of anything. If anything, it's just an appeal to law.
it isn't funny
Your opinion. There have been cases where people have been misinterpreted by the government. Everyone involved knew it was a joke, but since the government doesn't know people, they took it seriously (although the fact it was a joke should have been obvious).
Having robotic, unsympathetic overlords as rulers can truly be harmful.
because the "likelihood" of carrying out a threat is not something that anyone except the threat maker can know
What are you talking about? After investigating (assuming it wasn't a completely obvious joke), if it is determined that they did not have the means to carry out the threat to begin with, a prison sentence likely won't be necessary.
For instance, if someone said that they were going to build a billion nuclear bombs in a single day and shoot them at the US, that would qualify as an obvious joke. At the very least, nothing to take seriously.
Why are we seizing websites for copyright-related matters? This is petty, a waste of manpower, a waste of time, a waste of taxpayer dollars, and despite all of this, there is no gain from doing so.
if you threaten mayhem, it is a not a "thought crime" to catch you and punish you on that basis
The likelihood of them carrying out the threat must also be taken into account. For instance, we can't punish people who were simply emotional and/or joking and had no intent to carry out the threat anyway.
Someone is generally innocent until they do/try to do something. Otherwise it's just a thought crime (unless they were threatening to do something and those threats were very likely to be carried out).
I understand the desire to protect people, but not at the cost of individual rights. Everything else is just "for the children"/TSA mentality.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow! Wow! Wow!
The dangerously high magnitudes of Gamemakerlessness you're exerting from your cheeks is simply astounding!
Return to Gamemakerdom, friend!
Return to Gamemakerdom, friend!
Return to Gamemakerdom, friend!
Return to Gamemakerdom, friend!
Time to use Gamemaker! You want to hip & cool, don't you? Then fuckin' use Gamemaker!
Pathetic. You're a pathetic loser.
That's why you need to switch to Gamemaker. Gamemaker will fix your pathetic self right up! Use Gamemaker, you fuckin' nothingness ultimatum!
Why you little wusaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
True Programmers use Gamemaker. You're nothin' if you say otherwise. Use Gamemaker. Only use Gamemaker. You're a Gamemakerless ultimatum!
Use Gamemaker. I detected that you're not using Gamemaker. It'll make you more hip, and it offers extreme slowness. Why not use Gamemaker? There are an infinite amount of reasons that you should, and no reasons that you shouldn't.
Switch to Gamemaker. Return to Gamemakerdom.
Greetings, my friend. Why have you not returned to Gamemakerdom yet?
Use Gamemaker. Use it right now. Why not use Gamemaker. There is simply no reason to not use Gamemaker. Time to switch to Gamemaker. Why not make the switch to Gamemaker? There's no reason for you to not use Gamemaker. None at all.
Return... to Gamemakerdom right this minuteness!
I think you have a right to know this: every fiber of your being is exerting dangerously high magnitudes of Gamemakerlessnesses. You need to start using Gamemaker, friend.
You piece of garbage! Why aren't you using Gamemaker!?
Get with the times, friend. Use Gamemaker. Everyone is using Gamemaker. Gamemaker is great. There is nothing better than Gamemaker.
Gamemaker, Gamemaker, Gamemaker! Start using Gamemaker if you know what's good for you.
What do you have against Gamemaker? Why aren't you using Gamemaker? Why not switch to Gamemaker? Gamemaker's great. There's nothing more relaxing and fun than using Gamemaker. Use Gamemaker.
Why not return to Gamemakerdom today? Is there some reason you're not returning to Gamemakerdom right this minuteness? You'd better return to it.
Something is terribly amiss, my friend. I've been observing this phenomenon for some time now, but... could it be that you're not using Gamemaker? I'm detecting that you're not using Gamemaker (as you should be doing).
Return to Gamemakerdom. Return to it right this minuteness. What on Earth are you waiting for? Return to Gamemakerdom.
Comparing the negative response to the idea of installing Twitter in a car to the hysterical comparison of such negative responses to the support of the TSA and the Patriot Act and strongly implying support of totalitarianism?
They're merely inconsistent. The logic is the same. "Surrender some freedom for security." The amount of freedom is irrelevant. Getting fondled at an airport, for instance, is much less severe than it could be. But some people pretend that because it's only a small loss of freedom that it isn't a bad thing. I disagree. And the reason I disagree is that people assume that everyone will abuse these features, and that's not necessarily true. I'm against collective punishment.
Return to Gamemakerdom. Cease this Gamemakerless nonsense. You'd better return to Gamemakerdom.
Do not disappoint me. All True Programmers use Gamemaker, and Komen Bryce also commands that you use it.
Neither of those. The truth is that Gamemaker reigns supreme over everything else. Gamemaker has no flaws, and it is a perfect language.
That's why you, a mere Gamemakerless ultimatum, must return to Gamemakerdom. How can you claim to be a programmer if you're not using Gamemaker? That's laughable at best, and intentionally deceptive at worst.
It's 100% true. I use Gamemaker, and I'm proud of it! In fact, everyone who doesn't is simply a disgrace. All True Programmers use Gamemaker.
Return, return, return, return, return to Gamemakerdooooooooooooom!
Have people really lost sight of liberty so much?
Yes. They get too emotional about casualties in the name of freedom and opt to restrict what other people are able to do. They cannot handle even a single loss, and they don't even realize that their 'solutions' will often not even solve the problem.
This is why some people support the TSA and the Patriot Act. "We must restrict everyone's rights in exchange for a bit of safety." It's just that there are different things that they want to sacrifice freedom for. In some cases, it's terrorism (restricting people's rights to "stop the terrorists" doesn't seem popular here). In some cases, it's children (I've noticed this is more popular here, especially when it comes to issues like child porn).
That cannot be! Such power...! I've never seen such high magnitudes of ferocity being exerted from a single cheek before...!
I shall return to Gamemakerdom right this minuteness.
At what point is it acceptable for them to step in?
When the threat not only looks credible, but it's likely that you'll be able to carry it out.
The government has misinterpreted obvious jokes before. Threats that were not credible at all. All parties involved knew they were jokes, but since the government doesn't know the people and is an emotionless overlord, it took them seriously.
If a threat is not likely to be carried out, it's just a waste of taxpayer money (and an individual's freedom) to imprison them. They could be joking/emotional. Very possible with human beings.
Might as well defend the TSA if you want to defend against unlikely threats.
He did do something.
Okay.
After all, by your concept of thought crime
Did you read my comment? "(unless they were threatening to do something and those threats were very likely to be carried out)."
But I do have a problem with imprisoning them if it's not damn likely that they were going to carry out the supposed plan.
All of my arguments were completely obliterated!
Early exposure to porn as serious detrimental effect latter in life. It's well documented.
Well, damn. I guess I'm just a rapist then. Or whatever that "detrimental effect" is. Probably similar to video games making people murderers.
No, but you should have to! What if someone innocent (unlike you, you murderer) accidentally reads those books and gets offended? People have a right to not be offended, you know.
Please don't make it a hassle for people who want to view the content. Not for the children, and not for anyone else. This isn't necessary. We've lived without this, and somehow the world hasn't collapsed due to it yet.
This anti-sexuality nonsense has got to go. Even if a child does see the content, it will most likely not hurt them, anyway. I'd say ignorance is far more damaging.
go ahead and threaten to kill someone. then later say you were just being emotional or joking. tell us how that works out for you
Citing how the law is right now not isn't going to convince me of anything. If anything, it's just an appeal to law.
it isn't funny
Your opinion. There have been cases where people have been misinterpreted by the government. Everyone involved knew it was a joke, but since the government doesn't know people, they took it seriously (although the fact it was a joke should have been obvious).
Having robotic, unsympathetic overlords as rulers can truly be harmful.
because the "likelihood" of carrying out a threat is not something that anyone except the threat maker can know
What are you talking about? After investigating (assuming it wasn't a completely obvious joke), if it is determined that they did not have the means to carry out the threat to begin with, a prison sentence likely won't be necessary.
For instance, if someone said that they were going to build a billion nuclear bombs in a single day and shoot them at the US, that would qualify as an obvious joke. At the very least, nothing to take seriously.
Lighten up.
Why are we seizing websites for copyright-related matters? This is petty, a waste of manpower, a waste of time, a waste of taxpayer dollars, and despite all of this, there is no gain from doing so.
if you threaten mayhem, it is a not a "thought crime" to catch you and punish you on that basis
The likelihood of them carrying out the threat must also be taken into account. For instance, we can't punish people who were simply emotional and/or joking and had no intent to carry out the threat anyway.
Someone is generally innocent until they do/try to do something. Otherwise it's just a thought crime (unless they were threatening to do something and those threats were very likely to be carried out).
I understand the desire to protect people, but not at the cost of individual rights. Everything else is just "for the children"/TSA mentality.