Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Nox

  1. Where did those topics go? I want to read them again.
  2. It's been a journey really. I remember being on the original Onision forums back in 2011. Life was shitty back in '11 and I found comfort in Onision Speaks videos. At the time, his "advice" felt like a decent surrogate to shitty parenting. Boy was that wrong. I worked my way up to being a moderator while I was there; I felt like it was one of the few ways I could really contribute to a community. This was half-true. Mods were just a bandage when the forum's true problem, its owner, reared his ugly head. I think Ryan would have been a mirror in this weird metaphor. Onision's garbage had been around for a while, but Ryan got me to really look at the forum's ugly side. Ridiculous censorship rules, a dogmatic owner... My removal as mod for being "male" was the last nail in the coffin for me. ("Male" was another word for "he made me feel butthurt"- you'd think for being such a popular youtuber, "Bananafaglord" shouldn't mean a thing.) I think my first real encounter with @ragreynolds was when I first asked him wtf he was up to. I didn't get an answer immediately (who would really respond to an OFO mod's questioning?). The answer came with the creation of RR. The details get fuzzy around that point. I remember getting my moderation position back only to leave it for RR. Good riddance. Details get fuzzy around then. I tend to remember things I wish I had done differently most of all. For example, I wish I was a better admin to RR when I had the chance. I'm certainly no suicide bomber but I could have done better than I had. I'm glad I was able to help out when I was there. I wish I talked to a lot of you more often. Besides RR, life was a certain kind of hell for me. I was stuck with abusive and neglectful parents for most of my time here, and I'm still learning about how much it fucked me up. It made me isolate myself, become arbitrarily critical, and I feel that I alienated a lot of you with it. This forum was an eye-opener in a few ways for me. It was one of the many factors that drove me towards getting some psychological help. RR helped me realize I had some problems and I'm thankful for it. In a way, RR gave me more support than my family ever could have. Maybe some of you have felt the same? I've been busy, besides that junk. I'm a semester away from graduating with three associates degrees, two away from a bachelor's. It seems like RR will be gone before either happens, though. I'm happy to have been here in the first place.
  3. Nice title card
  4. 4/5 stars. Excellent coaster; its cover sometimes sticks to condensation.
  5. My house wasn't burned down.

  6. The city I'm in is on fire. I may have to evacuate. If y'all don't hear from me, good luck.

    1. bryanna


      shouldnt we be the ones saying good luck?

    2. Nox
  7. Ryan Reynolds.
  8. Looks like the queen is back. Long live the queen!
  9. I'd love a sci-fi themed ASMR video, Ryan <3

  10. Realistically speaking, business owners have a right to refuse service to anyone. We can't make them serve us. They could legally deny me from buying alcohol for any reason including pregnancy.
  11. Would you be willing to pour beer down an infant's throat? Would you be willing to give a beer to someone who you knew was going to feed it to a baby? Why is it different if the baby hasn't been born yet? I think it goes without saying that businesses should have the right to refuse service to anyone. This would extend to pregnant women, I imagine.
  12. I think the op died.
  13. Bananafaglord is still relevant?
  14. He should never make another forum.
  15. Yeah, turns out their subreddit had some posts about him too. The ED article got a sentence or two about it as well. That's about all he's worth I guess.
  16. He's a performer, I'll count that as trolling.
  17. Basic rules: Post an out-of-context quote from someplace on the internet . The next poster must guess if the quote was genuine, or an attempt at trolling. Don't say anything about a quote's origins until another poster reads/watches/whatever-s and makes a guess. Due to the nature of these things, there may not be a correct guess. Try to keep things short, if you can. Example: To begin, lets turn on the oven: "It matters because jews are pushing a malevolent and harmful agenda. Judaism is actually a Satanic religion. The Messiah said that the jewish Pharisees were "children of hell" (Matthew 23:15), "of their father the devil" (John 8:44), and a "synagogue of Satan" (Revelation 2:9). Judaism is not the Old Testament. It is an occult/Satanic religion that follows the Babylonian Talmud and Kaballah. The jews are soldiers for Satan, and are leading the Satanic "New World Order" agenda. And look at the fruits of jewish power and influence. For instance, the jews 100% run Hollywood and the porn industry. They use these things to push their anti-Christ, Satanic agenda."
  18. I'm glad to see the recent topics feed is back.

  19. One can't judge Jan Terri on a 0-10 scale. It just doesn't do her justice.
  20. @bryanna won't look at me anymore
  21. Ideally, I'd rather pedophiles be fucking child-shaped dolls than actual children. It's hard to make any opinion here without any objective data. My knee-jerk reaction is to say no to (most) things being outright banned. I see little good taking away one of a pedophile's few sexual outlets, especially if they keep a pedophile from preying on real kids. I'm of the opinion that so long as people (including kids age < 18) aren't being harmed, they can have that outlet. This relies on an assumption that pedophiles aren't necessarily predators and that sexual outlets stave off predatory behavior. That being said, I don't want pedophilia normalized as a fetish. I don't know how I would feel about these products becoming popular; without data, it's harder to speculate. What if these child-sized dolls caught on because they were more affordable? I doubt that would happen if they looked like kids, but what if they dolls were made so that they could look like children (picture something like an adult build-a-bear workshop)? That seems more realistic, given the internet, but does that layer of nuance change anything? I find it hard to draw a moral line here, but there could be something I'm overlooking. If one wanted a sex doll and a company sold high quality dolls of varying prices and sizes, it could be that the smaller ones are less expensive because they use less materials. Should they be banned on the sole principal that they look like children, or that they're sex toys and look like children? What if the product was child-sized but the customer had to make them look like children? Would you want their fucked up sexual needs to stop you from being able to buy a blank toy? And if not, why is it wrong for the company to bridge that gap for their customer? All of those questions could be invalidated by the right data, so I'm up in the air as it stands now. The only thing that I can be certain about is that these dolls (or their sexual parts) will be restricted to adults due to their nature. I feel that is the most fair regulation you can put on the products since it already limits access to children and makes it illegal for them to be exposed to it. Anymore regulation could easily become a bureaucratic nightmare and another taxpayer burden.
  22. Does that count as enlightenment?
  23. > situation NK acts like this every year. I doubt much of anything is going to happen other than a dick measuring contest.
  24. 6/10. Not bad music, just not my style.
  25. 1/10, don't much care for anything to do with British monarchs. Been that way for the past few centuries. I can agree with the tradition bit, but purpose is hard to justify. Religion is an evolving part of culture, meaning that traditions can change. I dislike ideological stagnation and traditions are rife with them and some people use tradition as an excuse to avoid change. Like I said, I don't really care what the monarch wants to do and I need more context to form a better opinion. _____________ I'm gonna exaggerate my views with this one: A generic libertarian perspective, in the scope of US politics, is morally wrong. @Seeker and I talked about differences between libertarian policy in Sweden Vs. US. From what I remember, Sweden has universal basic income but no minimum wage laws. This is antithetical to some US libertarians, who believe any form of taxation is theft. Some would consider zero-minimum-wage laws and no taxation to be beneficial; I see that as a form of libertarian extremism and try to avoid those talks. To elaborate: most US libertarians are anti-regulation anti-tax and pro free market. At their worst, they advocate total-market rule and advocate the destruction of our rights. In this case, I argue that libertarians advocate destroying our rights through the free market. In the US, to work a job is to sign away your rights for money. Your freedom of speech is taken away along with your freedom of self-expression. Libertarians will make the argument that at-will employment offsets this, but the argument seems hypocritical. Our 4th amendment rights are broken daily as companies dig deeper into our lives. A libertarian argues that a government doesn't give you choice. It forces itself upon you and is always looking to take away your rights and money. That sounds exactly like what the market does too. Businesses need these sorts of restrictions; that I can agree with. What I don't agree with is how the libertarian viewpoint ignores this and the effects big business has on our rights. There are many big-business lobbies that are working hard to limit our rights, and its their money that's allowing them to do it. In the end, it does come down to the politician's actions yet many libertarians will ignore the market's role. This is where I take issue. Now, I believe that capitalism is the best system we have for individual growth, but it isn't perfect by itself. It's unwise to think a free market has all of the solutions or that a free market implies a free people.