Yeah we hijacked the fluff out of the Chinese Gooseberry and rebranded it the Kiwifruit while China was killing itself during the Cultural Revolution.

Lol, this is outstanding.

I prefer to be referred to as a recyclable.

I genuinely agree. Porn these days puts far too much on the table.

Leaving it to the imagination is sometimes better than just straight up seeing a girl take a dump on another girl's purple painted toes.

The cum gutters on Young Arnold. Yeow.

In New Zealand, it was SKY1 late night softcore porn. You'd have to wait past midnight before it would start. One of them had a ridiculous premise of a tiara that one woman would wear and she could feel the pleasure of another woman wearing a linked necklace. At some point, the necklace falls onto the floor and a cat slips its head inside it, and the women starts acting like a cat or something.

It was fluffing weird but that was the first time I ever watched more than the 3-4 minutes I needed to.

Vacay? Don't throw shade. It's a mercy.

I feel it’s unfair to Nazi’s that they’re the only ones ever used as examples whenever people act all authoritarian and abuse their power to silence people.

Lots of different groups did that.

The guy was talking out his arse. Northland is fine as far as people go, and it has some of the most beautiful countryside up those ways too. Small towns, though, but not dissimilar in size and “Sweet fluff all happening” as the majority of the South Island.

People from the South don’t usually venture up to Northland too often because it’s far too expensive. Or they’re racists and don’t like that Northland is full of brown people. Ask any Kiwi if they were surprised that, of all the places for a mosque to be shot up, it was in Christchurch.

That flips for Northland people going down South too. Why go down to “Honkeyville” just to freeze your arse off and wonder why the only breakfast option they have is plain toast?

Literally, NZ is like maybe four towns dressed up as cities, and everything in between is farm farm farm church pub farm farm pub church farm farm farm beach overpriced tourist cafe pub church farm farm farm - with a lot of it populated by small town farmers, Church goers and surfers/fishermen who are friendly enough but won’t be able to get through five consecutive sentences without saying something racist or bigoted.

tl;dr - NZ isn’t murderous but we’re pretty good racists.

Source: I grew up in the South and my wife is from the north of the North. We’re equally racist to our mixed race baby.

Nah, no offence at all mate.

I don't have any problem with being charged to return. The Government can't afford to continue funding the quarantine for every returning Kiwi and, considering how well the country is doing with COVID, it's unsurprising that a huge number of expats are trying to return.

But I can afford it. I left NZ for the sort of salary where I can comfortably afford to pay $3,000 as an unexpected cost. I'm unsure how I feel about the cost being demanded of people who can't afford it, though. Not all of those people will be voluntarily moving home - some will have found themselves without jobs or without income for such a sustained period of time, and will find themselves ineligible for the sort of welfare support that their host countries might offer to their own citizens/residents.

We don't have to look far to know that, before COVID, Kiwi's who lost their jobs in Australia were not eligible for any financial support - regardless of the years they've spent paying taxes.

Because I have the money and I have a family that I have to pay for, I would like the option to either choose the level of accommodation I'm expected to spend two weeks in, or at least have the option to choose an AirBnB to rent for the period. I'll happily abide by all quarantine and isolation requirements, including check ups by the relevant authorities. Though I get that ballbags have fluffed that up by lying to health authorities, trying to escape and generally just being a bunch of fluffs, so I'm not super hopeful that'll happen.

But, yeah. I'm not mad. The Government needs to draw a line in the sand and decide when they're not longer financially responsible for returning Kiwis, and people need to recognise that it doesn't help to return home and instantly be a drain on the public purse.

I'll be home in December, if everything works out okay. Hopefully quarantine restrictions will have ended by then because I'd hate to spend Christmas locked in a hotel room. Though, if I get come home.. Well, that's the main thing.

Are you talking about this: https://apnews.com/...6d47c25d76d18000a3ea04511 ?

I've seen in here in Hong Kong too. Officers in groups - protected by numbers, equipment and the law - getting caught up in the moment and making decisions that lead to actions that realistically should be outside of what police and the public should expect.

But the danger of harm is what the police leadership use to dismiss any notion of wrong doing by its officers. When people, politicians and reporters point out the hypocrisy of it, they're accused of trying to destroy police morale. The heads of the Hong Kong Police Force have done such a ridiculous job of trying to paint to its own police force an "Us vs Them" mentality that fuels their perspective on the general public all being potential threats.

Hong Kong Police officers, individually, used to be fairly calm and reasonable people. Last year, it took an officer trying to run protesters over with his police bike before the public saw any accountability being shown for errors of judgment in officers.

https://nypost.com/...=618&h=410&crop=1

They look like they're a Eurovision band. Haha.

I don’t know if anyone knows where the line is when it comes to protecting yourself with your gun when your target is a police officer.

This has made me fearful for the apocalypse in a way that the actual apocalypse didn't.

Nice work!

So what is it called when LaF dispatch a suicider?

Rule #1: Don't get attached.

Don't make a mate out of the sheep you mate with.

Hillary is busy trying to cure Ghislaine Maxwell of COVID.

The tl;dr version of the above is: Stop being a baby. You're ruining the game for Evo because you don't like Marshal.

I don't see why you're trying to justify it on these boards as if you're going to win some popularity contest or swing public opinion against Marshal (at least the ones that haven't already swung against him anyway). I'd have far more respect for who you are and what you do if you just admitted "I'm an asshole and I like it. I hate Marshal so fluff Evo."

1. He didn't say he knew it was you because of your Barney tag. He said he knew it was you because that's the sort of behaviour you exhibit.

2. Even if Marshal knew it was you, Evo's response to your three initial grabs on #53 was to.. retal? None of that screams a concerted effort on Evo's part to destroy someone they know will be a problem for them. If they knew it was you, they should have killed you straight away but there's always the risk that you'd come here and paint the kill as bullying.

3a. Only you knew A, B and C for certain. That's the benefit of being a solo anon/no tag - you can prepare for whatever you want and, short of telling someone on discord or pm what you've got planned, you can make your "FS" a complete surprise.

3b. On the point of your "FS", don't tags normally fix on a few targets, break em and then kill before moving onto other targets? Your FS literally broke a few windows of a bunch of different countries and killed absolutely no one. I'm not an authority at all on wars on Earth so I don't know how to measure your "FS" but it would seem that Hawk was far better at killing Evo as a solo than you were.

4. I seriously doubt that Marshal stepping down from FA of Evo and continuing to talk fluff about you as a normal tagged member would stop you from your underhanded suiciding antics. Even if the new FA said "Marshal speaks only for himself, not for Evo" you'd still bear your grudge against the whole tag because that's the sort of player you are. An actual terrorist. You delight in sowing fear in Evo of you blindsiding them out of nowhere, which is ironic given how upset you were at Mercs then killing you in their defense. The game is far too small to pretend like FA's are the same as what they were in Earth's heyday but if you expect that a tag's FA speaks for the whole tag, then accept that tags also have defensive pacts with others and that's why you got shat on. If that pact was Marshal's doing as FA, then he's clearly doing something right.

-----

If I was in Evo, I would literally sacrifice my whole country, set after set, to ensure that you are given no tag protection from any of the existing tags. I'd FA everything I have, give up all of the land I have from now until I don't play this game anymore just to leave you with no place where you can hide from the repercussions of your actions. If you want to be a snake that hides in the shadows to terrorise and ruin the game for a group of tree huggers, then live there for the rest of your days.

You wanna be a bad boy, then own it. Don't tuck tail and slither back to protection under the very same rules you ignore when you choose to take your grudge with Marshal out on all of Evo.

That seems more like a personal issue between you and Marshal that you've decided to punish all of Evo for.

Sure, he's the Evo FA but I'm pretty sure that it was only Marshal that mentioned you with regards to the Evo kill last set. And, even then, he doesn't outright blame you - he just says that you're a prime suspect whenever there's a suicide (which may or may not be fair).

Then, after Gerdler confirms that it's not you, Marshal doesn't press the accusation again.

How that translates to "EVO has called me out!" is beyond normal logic but then this isn't really that far from the flimsy justification you've used in the past to ruin the game for a number of other players because of your personal dislike for Marshal.

Calling your one-man tag attack on Evo a "war" isn't really accurate. At best, you've hijacked a bunch of planes and flown them into the buildings of Evo other players because you don't like one guy. It's a terrorist act at best. Why? Because Marshal is always tagged Evo. You, on the other hand, seem to jump in and out of tags depending on your mood - which is fine, you're free to do that but it always means that Evo should be looking over its shoulder to see whether you're in a suicidal mood or not.

But if you clearly like being able to net with tag protection under LaF, it begs the question why you'd bother netting without it? Does LaF make you do things you don't want to do? One thing is clear, however. You don't see Marshal untagging Evo and hiding anonymously to attack LaF or any of the other clans you've been in because of his personal dislike for you.

LaF, very correctly, shouldn't bear the blame of your personal actions simply because you choose to hide there from time to time.

You've clearly said before that you want to punish all of Evo until they kick Marshal or quit the game completely. That, again, seems like a terrorists demand and toxic behaviour. You're not fighting some holy war on behalf of the EE community. You're not even defending your honour against a vindictive bully.

You're using a personal vendetta to pick on a fairly vulnerable netting tag because you know your disruptive suiciding is more likely to be successful and, other than Mercs jumping to Evo's defense, you're likely to get away with it.

I'm going to need 5 minutes alone guys.

I was an extra in Eagle vs Shark.

If tags were movies, what movies would they be?

:)

I get it. Libertarians are stuck between siding with socially liberal progressives who want want greater social freedoms for everyone but at the expense of bigger government and potentially higher taxes to pay for greater welfare, or siding with social conservatives who want to ban things like abortion, prostitution and gay marriage but are generally more open to smaller government if that means they can pay less tax towards govt funded welfare and donate more money personally to private charities, albeit those with a Christian agenda.

It's easier to safeguard against something you absolutely don't want (big government) at the expense of turning a blind eye to the restricting of a arguably non-essential "recognition" for an already marginalised minority (like gays not getting marriage).

What?

You said "Horse trading your values or beliefs or pretending to be something isn't how I define democracy" but you won't say how you do define it?

I'm not trying to define democracy, I'm asking how your example of Canada's dog being wagged by its tail is less democratic than the American two-party presidential system.

It's not mean to be a conclusive and comprehensive list of "These people go here, those people go there" but.. yeah, if I say to you "I don't think gay marriage should be legal" then it would be safe money to assume that I'm conservative, probably religious and possibly a Republican voter. If I said instead "I believe the government's only role should be national security and protecting property rights" you could probably bet on me being a libertarian, definitely an advocate for small government, supporter of capitalism, and (again) likely to be a Republican voter.

Yet, a libertarian wouldn't support a government banning gay marriage because it goes against the ideology - do as you wish as long as no harm comes to anyone. Likewise, a conservative Christian wouldn't be okay the legalising of prostitution or the easing of access to abortions but both are things that libertarians think should be legal and up to the individual as to whether or not they engage with such activities.

So why do they both likely vote Republican? It's because the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Conservatives hate social progressives who want to open up marriage for gays, abortion clinics for loose women, and introduce tolerance of non-binary genders to schools. Libertarians hate social progressives because they think speech should be censored if they can declare it hateful, that gender quotas should be set to enforce diversity and representation on boards, and the government should spend more money on welfare - meaning more taxes. Social progressives lean Left and vote Democrats.

It happens on the Left as well (don't worry). Green voters and climate change advocates want to shut down factories, stop deforestation and put taxes on pollution emitters. But unions also vote Left traditionally, the same sort of people who are negatively impacted by factories being shut down, forest work being culled, and taxes on pollution being passed on to working class consumers. But the enemy of their enemy is their friend.

Green voters will voters will have to swallow their pride and vote alongside workers of dirty factories because they both have a common enemy in the Right-leaning capitalist who the Greens see as the biggest roadblock to address climate change, and who workers can't not shake the feeling they're being exploited by them when hundreds or thousands of frontline staff lose their jobs while CEO's, board members and shareholders all get a tidy payout from the money saved.

An NRA-card carrying, gun owning Dem isn't fascinating. Of course they exist. Of course anti-vaxx Karen's also have gay friends and it makes them mad that they can't marry in some states. There will always be anomalies or exceptions or outliers to the norm.

What *is* weird is that Conservative Christians who generally support the Republican Party *still* support it under Trump, a man who has a list of sexual allegations far longer than the Book of Genesis. He wasn't grabbing pussies because they'd hidden a Bible inside them.

It's weird but it's not unfathomable. Your two-party political system produces this.

tl;dr - how many unsuccessful presidential nominee candidates on both sides rigorously attacked the eventual winner during the primaries but then changed their tune and endorsed them once they won the nomination? Look at Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris grilling Biden, then turning around and saying "I'm backing him!"

Classic Lefties? Look at all of the candidates that ruthlessly bagged Trump during the Republican contest then sang his praises as he came up against Clinton.

How do you define it?

Exactly. There are no viable alternatives in the US.

Their system crams green voters, socialists, social progressives, unionists, and creatives into one tent with “Kill The Rich” communist revolutionaries, fascist bashers, the “add more genders to the pile” lot, and then gives them moderate, corporate shill Joe Biden to vote for.

The religious conservatives, economic liberals, and libertarians get stuck in a tent with “Open carry to the supermarket” gun nuts, conspiracy theorists, anti-vax Karens, actual racists, and then goes “You better vote Trump or the other lot will win.”

That’s how you get Warren progressives voting for Middle of Nowhere Biden, or extremely Christian families voting for a pornstar humping, fluff grabbing Trump.

No wonder progressive Bernie Bros are like “Why vote?”

1. The Princess Bride
2. Saving Private Ryan
3. The Dark Knight
4. Stand By Me
5. Love Actually
6. Hot Fuzz
7. Spirited Away
8. The Godfather Pt I
9. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol I
10. Snatch

I would swap the Godfather and Saving Private Ryan out for the French movie The Intouchables or either Pulp Fiction of Django Unchained - depending on my mood. Older movies that just miss out on my top ten spots include Jack Lemmon in the 1960 film The Apartment and The Wizard of Oz. Other kids films I wish I had space for include Toy Story, the Goonies and The Road to El Dorado.

If we’re talking favourite movies from franchises..

1. Rush Hour 1
2. Sister Act 2
3. Star Wars: Rogue One
4. Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring
5. The Dark Knight
6. The Matrix Reloaded
7. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 1
8. Skyfall
9. Ocean’s 11
10. Toy Story

Honourable mentions: the Men In Black series, Thor Ragnarok, Avengers: Endgame, the Shrek series, Jurassic Park and the Star Trek movies.

How can elected representatives from different parties having to come together to negotiate on laws be less democratic than a winner take all two-party system where voters have to compromise on their personal values not to just support their “team” but make sure the other team doesn’t win?

Are they?

Genuinely, I don’t understand how Americans put up with their political system. Having two parties to choose from, with two dumb AF old men as options for President?

Riot for a better electoral process.

Will we kill the wiki if we keep weakening it weekly?

Bonus.

Anyone else getting a 404 on one of the bonus sites?

http://mmorpg.top100arena.com/...=51155&incentive=3586

I genuinely have nothing else to ask or add. Thanks for that response, KoH.

No dissent, no criticism, no questions?

What about when someone speaks ill of the military? American's are notorious for their attitudes towards "Supporting Our Troops" and people who disrespect those who have served etc.

No dissent, no criticism, no questions?

Is that behaviour part of what's nudging the US towards being a tyrannical state?

Ah, I think I've made the mistake of making this a 2nd Amendment-centred question rather than maybe just a US Constitution one. I don't mean to make this a debate of whether there should be more or less gun control.

What I'm wondering is when normal American's think they'll need to arm themselves and fight back. Particularly, if they believe like you do, that the country is already headed towards tyranny.

Nazi Germany didn't happen overnight. Maybe if the German people had seen the signs and been armed, they might have been able to stop the Nazi's from gaining power and consolidating it through restricting freedoms and empowering state-policing.

Is the government/police response to these protests legitimate or simply part of the slide towards authoritarianism?

And what does it look and feel like in an American context?

I meant what would a tyrannical govt in America look like, such that the 2nd becomes a reasonable justification for fighting against the government.

And does that make killing cops okay?

Legit lol.

But if you don’t know what a tyrannical govt looks like, how will you know when it’s time to use your guns?

Does it look like a police force that performs extrajudicial killings of innocent civilians in the streets with seemingly no fear of consequence?

They're still a bunch of cheating sandpapering underarm bowling jerks.

Maybe I"m just salty we can never win a Super Over.

x

Tell your people to stock up on empty bottles in case their toilets have broken in all of the quakes.

Lol bringing up cricket sledges?!

Next you'll be accusing him of underarm bowling the final ball.

The earth is healing itself.

If you like JW so much, why would you put him in a position where he's responsible for your actions?

Thank goodness he did.

I was wondering what Multi-Level Marketing had to do with thread.