Hornshire

You showed them your fanfic stuff?

Some of us are just brimming with such a multitude of complexity and equivocation, that any attempt at cursory reduction would be as humorless as it was futile. Then again, others of us are just all too easy to forget. Some of Us prefer it that way.

Gone With the Wind was in color, kitten.

We didn't watch that nearly as much as the cartoon. Largely because of Pooh's eyes. They're all wrong. Like it's not really Pooh, but Mickey Mouse wearing Pooh's skin.

Looks to be from an unofficial forum on ezboard, which is now Yuku... but their search function doesn't seem to be working. We would think it would have shut down when the official one went up, but that seems not to be the case given the reference to teh suck in the first Christina Ricci banner, and also We think Esurance came much later than '03, but We're not one hundred percent on that. Also: "DO NOT LINK TO ANY OF THE IMAGES ON THESE PAGES." Lel.

Pretty sure you'll be back on "vacation" within a week.

80%, probably would've been closer to 50 if there were more than two options per question. Like, We don't know a damn thing about "Coffy", We just know "Jackie Brown" came much later than the 70's.

Youtube as a whole is a sign of cultural collapse.

Grats. We tried reading it a couple years ago. Had no trouble getting a hold of it, just getting through it. Largely due to Our schedule at the time, and very little to do with the book itself. We really should finish it some time. Perhaps We should look into it sooner rather than later, as Our current locale has much more conservative leanings than where We first borrowed it. Anywho, hope you enjoy it.

It's so tiny.

Personally, We don't feel Zeni should have been banned in the first place. Granted, We are only vaguely aware of the final tipping point moment that culminated in his ejection. With more details, We could easily be swayed; It's not as though We think the ban was wholly unjustified. But given what's been said here about the ban being more the result of the constant day-to-day behavior as opposed to any one single action, Our initial assessment stands. Tic, on the other hand, more or less deserved it. It would have been a trivial matter to go on ignoring his constant shit posting, but his ban gave Us no pause. Full disclosure, though, the biggest difference between the two is that not once did We find Tic amusing. That being said, We see absolutely no reason to reverse course on either decision. At the crux of the matter is that the punishment they were handed down was for, in essence, not being able to change their ways. Sure, people can change, but in actuality, they seldom do. Unless you have very good reason to think either have been affected in some way, it stands to reason to leave things as they currently are. That's Our opinion, for what it's worth. Which, seeing how it was given after you've already come to a decision it seems, can't be much. On a further note, We find it odd that you would pose this question so openly. General consensus is terribly whimsical, and as such, not particularly suited for regulating a code of conduct. When you have a system where the answer to questions like "Why was I banned/not unbanned?" is, if we're being totally honest, "You weren't popular enough." that is the height of unfairness. You really should have some guiding principals that determines, or at the very least a framework that suggests, the answers to these sort of questions.

We're about at a Tenchi Muyo

It's just a jump to the left...

Moral reservations aside, of which We have plenty, the imminent legal issues make chances of profit almost certainly nonexistent.

Nah, dude. Silver and bronze always get to stand at the podium. Also, Side note: merit is not a function of time.

Broccoli, followed by cucumbers, followed by carrots.

For sure, it wasn't the only factor. Probably not even the largest one, but certainly a significant one in the narrative as a whole. And the guiding principal behind this ideological intolerance, to Our mind at least, is part of a larger current that speaks to the state of our society at large, namely a notion that dealing with problems is not a matter of solving them, but rather just making them go away. This manifests itself in many forms, some seemingly benign, such as disliking things on social media to tailor your feed to be entirely agreeable, and some less so, firing the director of the FBI because you're unhappy with how he's handling an investigation.

The face on the top right looks like Kyle Dunnigan.

It's far more accurate to say that his presidency is a response to this brand of radical leftist extremism than its origin. It raises the question, when you look at the results they get- in this case, lip-service to diversity in exchange for legitimizing the fears of free-speech advocates, becoming the caricature of PC Police, and trivializing the actual transgressions of those they're supposedly advocating for by nature of the sheer insanity of the methods they employ- what are they actually trying to achieve?

Our one and only.

They wouldn't be in your threads if you stopped making any. Just saying.

Flappy Bird

House of the Dead

Called it. No way were We falling for that "couldn't be!" BS.

We're generally skeptical so, indeed, probably not. But then, We don't particularly give much credence to your assessment either... We're getting off the train here, as the next stop is Paradox.