Joshjrn
| Favorite team: | LSU  |
| Location: | Baton Rouge |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 32927 |
| Registered on: | 12/24/2008 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Do you call your children's teachers "Mrs."?
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/29/26 at 1:28 pm to BurningHeart
quote:
My wife does this but I cant bring myself to put a Mrs. in front of a name especially when they're younger than me. Definitely wouldnt do it for male teachers, just sounds a bit pansy for a man to call a younger man Mr.
Before I get to know them well, I call my law clerks Mr./Ms. and sir/ma’am. I can’t imagine being as insecure as what’s stated in this OP :lol:
0
re: Stand-by Generator for home. Worth it?
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/29/26 at 10:06 am to hassan whiteside
Depends on whether the expense will hurt and how often you lose power. Would I have liked having one in 2021 when Ida came through? Absolutely. Would I be somewhat annoyed if I had gotten one after Ida and then haven’t lost power for more than an hour or two at a time for the half decade since? More than likely :lol:
re: My theory on why baby boomers are criticized
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/27/26 at 11:18 pm to wallowinit
quote:
So a boomer fricked your woman. She fricked that boomer because she recognized that you are a limp dick loser, loser.
You’d be hard pressed to come up with a single metric in which I wouldn’t be considered “successful”, but considering your chosen projection, it sounds like you have some… inadequacies… to compensate for, so I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised at the level of retardation you’re needing to stoop to in order to do so :lol:
re: My theory on why baby boomers are criticized
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/27/26 at 11:07 pm to wallowinit
quote:
I’d rather be a retarded winner than a loser loser. It has become extremely fatiguing listening to you losers whine about the boomers simply because you are a loser. You’ll never really amount to anything because you’re a loser, loser. This is the message I have for all of you losers who whine about the boomers who took all their stuff or whatever. You’re a fricking loser.
I love that you’re such a weak minded little retard pussy that you needed to create this absurd fiction just to cope with me pointing out that people talk shite about boomers because boomers spent decades talking shite about everyone else :lol:
re: My theory on why baby boomers are criticized
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/27/26 at 10:29 pm to wallowinit
quote:
I’ve got Loser fatigue, loser.
It must be tremendously fatiguing to be as fricking retarded as you are :lol:
re: My theory on why baby boomers are criticized
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/27/26 at 9:55 pm to wallowinit
quote:
Boo fricking who you fricking pussy You’re just angry because you’re a fricking loser in life. A boomer didn’t do that to you. Your loser attitude did it to you, loser. There’s a whole bunch of people, your age and younger that are just killing it and they don’t give a frick about boomer or any other label that you losers put on people. Stop being a loser, loser.
Holy shite, you’re fricking retarded :lol:
quote:
relax my man
Sounds like you are projecting someone else's arguments to go after me
I neither stated what they said was factual in whole nor in part, I did not state that their reason was or was not propoganda. The only thing I take issue with is "take their word for it"
so I ask, do you always take these institution's word for it. My argument is simply should not go with something because they said so.
I have a feeling that your argument for your belief goes deeper than that, but you narrowed your side of the argument downt to "because they said so"
I probably should not have made my point the saracstic and condescending way I did, as I knew it would not be productive. I was just being antagonistic
And for the record, I do believe slavery and the circumstances surounding it financially, were very much a primary issue for southern states and secession
I'm not projecting anything; I have a feeling that your glee in launching into a sarcastic ad hominem caused you to force an interpretation of my post that no reasonable, rational reader would have come to otherwise. No, I obviously don't "always take these institution's word for it". But in this case, Occam's Razor would hold that absent some significant indicator to the contrary, we probably shouldn't wholesale ignore their very clearly stated motivations. And within that context, doing a drive by "hur dur you believe all governments" is a silly distraction at best and intentional obfuscation at worst, in my opinion :cheers:
quote:
Reduction to Absurdity fallacy, being skeptical of government and bureaucratic institutions does not mean I believe they only produce lies and propganda It is appropriate to take their actions with a degree of skepticism and retorospection, rather than simply say "I will take their word for it" or to use your fallacy, do you simply "take their word for it" all the time because you are taking their word for it in this instance? Or to put it my argument more succinctly, do not take anyone's word for it
This is solipsistic drivel masquerading as critical analysis. The context of the conversation you waded into was my saying that the southern states very clearly stated their reasons for secession and a fellow poster arguing that we should ignore their clearly stated reasons as propaganda. As that poster provided zero evidence as to why we should ignore it as propaganda, outside of an utterly baseless assertion that poor whites had no interest in maintaining their present social status, I stated that I’m inclined to take the southern states at their word. Apparently that hurt your feelings a bit, which is how we ended up on this utterly silly tangent.
But to get back on topic: do you believe that the southern states seceded primarily to preserve the institution of slavery or not?
quote:
I too prefer to take government and bureaucratic institutions at their word as these are not the types that would ever feed us propaganda. In fact I dare say that these institutions speak for and represent full heartedly all of their constituents. Great point
I assume you also consider th Declaration of Independence to be rank propaganda that doesn’t in any way reflect the actual thoughts and motivations of the founders?
No complaints about mine. They leave everyone alone unless there is a clear problem that needs to be fixed.
re: Clair Obscur Expedition 33 Thread;No Spoilers 92% metascore
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/26/26 at 6:34 pm to travelgamer
quote:
I tried this and refunded it, the mechanics just didn't work for me. Why do I have to select my target every round of combat when there is only one target there. The cut scenes are way too long and slow. I get that so many like it just not my cup of tea.
You have to select your target because you or your mates can also be the target, depending on what you’re doing. If you aren’t enjoying the cutscenes, then it was probably a good idea to refund. Not every game is for everyone :cheers:
re: The Cost of Safetyism
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/26/26 at 1:51 pm to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
It’s funny that you made this post right after the person ahead of you apparently posted a nude pic (post deleted before I saw it)
Not sure why it would be funny. I didn’t see the post, but it was either an embed, which would be utterly unrelated to what we’re talking about, or it was a “blind link”, which while relevant, doesn’t undermine my position that trusting people to tell you where a link goes is horrible security practice, which is why every other board I’ve ever been on simply expects you to look where you’re going before you go there. Because at the end of the day, there’s nothing stopping me from typing “OANN” and then linking you to goatse.
re: The Cost of Safetyism
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/26/26 at 11:09 am to Stat M Repairman
quote:
One factor is that neighborhood Karens are on a hair trigger and will call the cops on kids roaming around doing pretty much anything. They got a phone and video camera in their pocket and a cadre of cameras watching anything that moves. The latest trend is them nagging people on nextdoor and calling the cops about kids on e-bikes / minibikes.
This is actually touched on in the article:
quote:
And this leads to another legitimate fear. No one wants to be reported to child protective services. And it happens at an astonishing rate. According to a 2017 study, approximately 38% of all children will be investigated by CPS by the time they are 18. And the majority of those cases aren't about abuse. They're about supervisory neglect, children being somewhere without an adult.
Which ties into another thing preventing parents from lengthening the leash, judgment of others. If there’s one thing that’s skyrocketed over the last few decades it’s certainly judgment. With social media and other outlets, we walk around criticizing any and everyone. According to some recent data, 25% of parents admitted they had personally criticized another parent for not adequately supervising their child. So a quarter of parents are walking around as the enforcement mechanism.
re: The Cost of Safetyism
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/26/26 at 10:35 am to Pepe Lepew
quote:
A damn blind link
You know you can hover over it or long press it to see the destination, right? This is the only message board I’ve ever posted on that had an expectation that people would “warn” where the link went :lol:
re: Real History with Matt Walsh - Season 1 - Episode 03: The Real History of the Civil War
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/26/26 at 9:38 am to RedSoloSpitCup
quote:
Not lying. Just like the North, they had to drum up a cause that their rich benefactors would support. They chose slavery to have access to the planters' capital. The majority of poor southern whites weren't going to war over a planter's right to own slaves.
Now that’s simplistic. The 1960s clearly showed that people will viciously fight to protect a status quo that maintains their perceived standing in the social order, whether they get any further direct benefit or not. So while poor whites obviously didn’t give a shite about rich whites making more money, they had a significant interest in making sure they stayed above blacks in the social order.
Anyway, we are now in the realm of conjecture. As I said, I prefer to take the southern states at their very clearly stated word instead of assuming they were engaged in some form of propaganda based subterfuge :cheers:
re: My theory on why baby boomers are criticized
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/26/26 at 9:30 am to Ramblin Wreck
Boomers get shite on because they spent decades shitting on everyone younger than them, so when those people grew up, they shite on Boomers in return.
Somehow Boomers collectively forgot about the decades they spent talking shite about “Millennials” :lol:
Somehow Boomers collectively forgot about the decades they spent talking shite about “Millennials” :lol:
re: Real History with Matt Walsh - Season 1 - Episode 03: The Real History of the Civil War
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/26/26 at 9:24 am to RedSoloSpitCup
quote:
Over simplistic. It was about money. The South was making it on trade and the north was taxing it. The Tariff of Abominations (1828), The Nullification Crisis (1832-1833) and the Morrill Tariff (1861) led to the Civil War. Slavery was the justification to invade neighboring states for the sake of the almighty dollar.
I’m just taking the southern states at their word. Are you saying the states that listed the institution of slavery as their primary impetus for secession were lying?
quote:
Here's a question that no one has ever answered for me If the war was fought over slavery, why didn't the southern states return to the Union and ratify the Corwin Amendment? Why did non slave holding states ratify it?
The Confederacy seceded over slavery; the Union fought to stop the Confederacy from seceding.
People get themselves twisted into knots because they assume/pretend the two sides were fighting for the same reason when they weren’t. Anyone who reads the declarations of secession from the Confederate states and the Emancipation Proclamation will have it laid out for them in fairly plain language.
re: Nearly 1.2 billion people worldwide are living with mental disorders
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/24/26 at 1:47 pm to HarryHoudini
quote:
Social media. Get rid of that crap and that number drops by at least 50%. I guarantee it.
The human brain isn’t built to process information 24/7/365. The 24 hour news cycle combined with doomscrolling social media is absolutely destroying the mental health of the developed world.
re: ‘Please pay attention to me or my dog’
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/23/26 at 8:23 pm to BrohemAlem11
quote:
Ah..I'm starting to see now. You really are an a-hole which checks out as someone who brings a dog to a resturant..either that or you think this is a solid argument in which case you have an IQ lower than Gump. Noone NEEDS to go to a restaurant...but if thats something you want to do, it’s a reasonable expectation to not have a creature that pisses, barks and licks at the table next to you. Even as a parent I know there are some restuants that I should not bring my child and there is no reason for a dog to be at any resturant... the dog isnt ordering food, isnt eating, isnt socializing and can be easily left at home. There is literally no logical reason to bring it.
You made it about need, not me. Guess you want to move the goalposts now, though :lol:
Again, my dog doesn’t piss at the restaurant, doesn’t bark, and doesn’t lick anyone who doesn’t walk up and ask for licks. He makes no mess and bothers no one. And if he’s a very good boy, he gets unseasoned scrambled eggs or hamburger. I can also practically guarantee I tip better than you do. I’ll take it a step further: I would bet any amount of money you’d like that there are more servers who know my dog’s name and are happy to see him walk up than servers that know your name and are happy to see you walk up.
Anything else, you whiny, cantankerous little bitch? :lol:
re: ‘Please pay attention to me or my dog’
Posted by Joshjrn on 5/23/26 at 5:10 pm to weagle1999
quote:
It is more the people who bring their dogs out in public and then look furtively around hoping someone will pay them attention. Or say the dog’s name over and over again loudly to draw attention. You have seen the type
I don’t recall ever seeing anyone do this. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but it’s either staggeringly rare or exceedingly local.
Popular
26
