Author Topic: The Official Psychoanalysis GAF Thread (Read 3488112 times)

demi · « **Reply #13560 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:48:18 AM »

Ew, no

Tasty · « **Reply #13561 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:59:26 AM »

Quote from: demi on January 16, 2012, 10:48:18 AM

Ew, no

Racist.

Broseidon · « **Reply #13562 on:** January 16, 2012, 11:07:06 AM »

GAF's up.

Reb · « **Reply #13563 on:** January 16, 2012, 11:21:54 AM »

Not much, you?

Broseidon · « **Reply #13564 on:** January 16, 2012, 11:37:38 AM »

Just surfin' /gif/

Chinner · « **Reply #13565 on:** January 16, 2012, 02:51:07 PM »

i like /gif/ because it has lots of porn in it.

Tasty · « **Reply #13566 on:** January 16, 2012, 03:27:38 PM »

Even after coming up GAF has been slow as hell all day. Maybe a server problem, hopefully something to do with moving off GoDaddy.

Broseidon · « **Reply #13567 on:** January 16, 2012, 03:32:49 PM »

Quote from: Andrex on January 16, 2012, 03:27:38 PM

Even after coming up GAF has been slow as hell all day. Maybe a server problem, hopefully something to do with moving off GoDaddy.

So not just me then?

Takes ages for pages to load - if at all. Gets stuck half-loaded and have to keep refreshing for it to finish.

MCD · « **Reply #13568 on:** January 16, 2012, 04:02:55 PM »

Still rendering in IE7 mode.

SMH.

etiolate · « **Reply #13569 on:** January 17, 2012, 04:07:40 AM »

So a post of mine on GAF I just posted was quickly deleted. If the person responsible wants to say why here or PM here to explain then please do so. I know you all lurk.

Narag · « **Reply #13570 on:** January 17, 2012, 04:21:37 AM »

Quote from: etiolate on January 17, 2012, 04:07:40 AM

So a post of mine on GAF I just posted was quickly deleted. If the person responsible wants to say why here or PM here to explain then please do so. I know you all lurk.

Was this in the theist thread? EL said he was purging stuff related to administrative action.

Tasty · « **Reply #13571 on:** January 17, 2012, 04:29:41 AM »

Quote from: Narag on January 17, 2012, 04:21:37 AM

Quote from: etiolate on January 17, 2012, 04:07:40 AM
So a post of mine on GAF I just posted was quickly deleted. If the person responsible wants to say why here or PM here to explain then please do so. I know you all lurk.

Was this in the theist thread? EL said he was purging stuff related to administrative action.

What does that even mean?

benjipwns · « **Reply #13572 on:** January 17, 2012, 04:32:24 AM »

Don't talk about bannings/thread locks/etc.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=34334779&postcount=515

etiolate · « **Reply #13573 on:** January 17, 2012, 04:36:51 AM »

Quote from: Narag on January 17, 2012, 04:21:37 AM

Quote from: etiolate on January 17, 2012, 04:07:40 AM
So a post of mine on GAF I just posted was quickly deleted. If the person responsible wants to say why here or PM here to explain then please do so. I know you all lurk.

Was this in the theist thread? EL said he was purging stuff related to administrative action.

It was that thread. I was laughing at EL calling the thread a place of discussion. I'm not sure thats administrative action commentary. It was just laughing at EL being ridiculous.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #13574 on:** January 17, 2012, 04:53:45 AM »

He's got tissue paper skin. If he even perceives criticism it's on.

Tasty · « **Reply #13575 on:** January 17, 2012, 05:21:54 AM »

I don't know why that thread wasn't outright locked/merged anyways, there's already a Theism vs. Atheism thread.

etiolate · « **Reply #13576 on:** January 17, 2012, 05:34:33 AM »

Because... I don't know.

Momo · « **Reply #13577 on:** January 17, 2012, 06:25:41 AM »

Mupepe · « **Reply #13578 on:** January 17, 2012, 11:43:13 AM »

I remember the uncontrollable laughter when I first saw that picture, Momo. But now oddly it does nothing for me.

Momo · « **Reply #13579 on:** January 17, 2012, 12:07:18 PM »

Just saw it today for the first time, had a similar bout of uncontrollable laughter

Broseidon · « **Reply #13580 on:** January 17, 2012, 01:10:19 PM »

I wish that OogieBoogie guy would stop making threads.

Crushed · « **Reply #13581 on:** January 17, 2012, 01:42:57 PM »

Quote from: Andrex on January 17, 2012, 05:21:54 AM

I don't know why that thread wasn't outright locked/merged anyways, there's already a Theism vs. Atheism thread.

i remember the author of that thread got frequently banned for being an annoying cock, so seeing EL defend that thread is mindboggling

like, the dude's last thread was something like "Political Correctness vs. Reason: Which do you choose?" which is like smuginternetfuck.txt

oh yeah now i remember, he posted threads like "how do i get my religious girlfriend to stop believing in magic," and "my roommate is sick, he's gay and thus probably has AIDS, is he dying?" his post history is some maelstrom of internet atheism, bizarre bigotry, and thinly veiled bragging

etiolate · « **Reply #13582 on:** January 17, 2012, 06:03:20 PM »

And he got Evilore and Opiate to take him seriously? That's kind of funny.

Tasty · « **Reply #13583 on:** January 17, 2012, 07:25:38 PM »

Quote from: etiolate on January 17, 2012, 06:03:20 PM

And he got Evilore and Opiate to take him seriously? That's kind of funny.

Controversial threads = $$$

etiolate · « **Reply #13584 on:** January 18, 2012, 04:22:11 AM »

Hey now.

Russian Literature has only made me look crazy.

Momo · « **Reply #13585 on:** January 18, 2012, 04:43:33 AM »

To defeat opiate, post this

A heap of sand is comprised of a large collection of grains. (Premise 1)
A heap of sand minus one grain is still a heap. (Premise 2)

Repeated applications of Premise 2 (each time starting with one less number of grains), eventually forces one to accept the conclusion that a heap may be composed of just one grain of sand. On the face of it, there are some ways to avoid this conclusion. One may object to the first premise by denying that a large collection of grains makes a heap (or more generally, by denying that there are heaps). One may object to the second premise by stating that it is not true for all collections of grains that removing one grain from it still makes a heap. Or one may accept the conclusion by insisting that a heap of sand can be composed of just one grain.

etiolate · « **Reply #13586 on:** January 18, 2012, 04:49:33 AM »

=\

Opiate isn't actually all that rational. He just talks funny.

Momo · « **Reply #13587 on:** January 18, 2012, 05:06:27 AM »

Eh I have no real exposure to him *shrug*

magus · « **Reply #13588 on:** January 18, 2012, 08:47:13 AM »

it's been awhile someone posted an inane thread where someone ask a stupid question and then a bunch of people name game in an almost random manner so i'm here to cover that hole

http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459207

archie4208 · « **Reply #13589 on:** January 18, 2012, 09:08:33 AM »

http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459297

I love these threads. You can tell it is cathartic for all the posters who want to rage against popular vidya but are afraid to do so in other places.

Momo · « **Reply #13590 on:** January 18, 2012, 09:36:19 AM »

http://neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=34364282&postcount=841

Broseidon · « **Reply #13591 on:** January 18, 2012, 09:43:57 AM »

Quote from: Momo on January 18, 2012, 04:43:33 AM

To defeat opiate, post this

A heap of sand is comprised of a large collection of grains. (Premise 1)
A heap of sand minus one grain is still a heap. (Premise 2)

Repeated applications of Premise 2 (each time starting with one less number of grains), eventually forces one to accept the conclusion that a heap may be composed of just one grain of sand. On the face of it, there are some ways to avoid this conclusion. One may object to the first premise by denying that a large collection of grains makes a heap (or more generally, by denying that there are heaps). One may object to the second premise by stating that it is not true for all collections of grains that removing one grain from it still makes a heap. Or one may accept the conclusion by insisting that a heap of sand can be composed of just one grain.

Leave your Sorites bullshit outta this thread, Momo.

Momo · « **Reply #13592 on:** January 18, 2012, 09:51:11 AM »

Quote from: Broseidon on January 18, 2012, 09:43:57 AM

Leave your Sorites bullshit outta this thread, Momo.

I take it the sorites paradox has caused you some headaches before?

tiesto · « **Reply #13593 on:** January 18, 2012, 11:10:36 AM »

Quote from: archie4208 on January 18, 2012, 09:08:33 AM

http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459297

I love these threads. You can tell it is cathartic for all the posters who want to rage against popular vidya but are afraid to do so in other places.

Ehhh, I rage against western "AAA" games whenever I get the chance, I don't need that thread to do it

Tasty · « **Reply #13594 on:** January 18, 2012, 12:17:18 PM »

My second attempt at starting an avatar meme is a success. You may call me... TRENDSETTER

Steve Youngblood · « **Reply #13595 on:** January 18, 2012, 12:18:53 PM »

Quote from: Andrex on January 18, 2012, 12:17:18 PM

My second attempt at starting an avatar meme is a success. You may call me... TRENDSETTER

You cannot fathom how envious I am. I know that performing such a feat myself is certainly on my bucket list.

benjipwns · « **Reply #13596 on:** January 18, 2012, 09:43:50 PM »

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=34381821&postcount=173

Guy worked at GameStop and EA guy came in wanting RE4. CONFIRMED.

Reb · « **Reply #13597 on:** January 19, 2012, 08:18:46 AM »

This is embarrassing:

http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=448236&page=6

Momo · « **Reply #13598 on:** January 19, 2012, 09:25:56 AM »

I think I mentioned that thread before and compared it to the frequency thread.

brob · « **Reply #13599 on:** January 19, 2012, 10:41:55 AM »

wrath got banned again? search is still down so someone tell me whats up

Steve Youngblood · « **Reply #13600 on:** January 19, 2012, 10:46:44 AM »

Search is working for me.

I'm guessing it was this? http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=34237376&highlight=#post34237376

brob · « **Reply #13601 on:** January 19, 2012, 11:04:52 AM »

ya, search working now. cheers.

that seemed like a jokey response to an obviously jokey remark though

Broseidon · « **Reply #13602 on:** January 19, 2012, 11:10:29 AM »

Silly Saudi

Mupepe · « **Reply #13603 on:** January 19, 2012, 03:48:59 PM »

http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459067&page=8

There are some really, really naive people in this thread. Especially on that page. They really think the 200+ Chinese Navy ships would be anything more than a nuisance for the US Navy? They really don't think in an all out war the world wouldn't revert back to carpet bombing campaigns in a win at any cost scenario? What the hell are they smoking?

Steve Youngblood · « **Reply #13604 on:** January 19, 2012, 04:51:24 PM »

I guess the linking to old posts in that Greatest GAF Moments thread was a little too bold?

Cindi Mayweather · « **Reply #13605 on:** January 19, 2012, 04:51:24 PM »

i thought evilore said it was okay.

brob · « **Reply #13606 on:** January 19, 2012, 04:56:03 PM »

Quote from: Count Drugula The Satanic on January 19, 2012, 04:39:47 PM

Quote from: Brobzoid on January 19, 2012, 10:41:55 AM
wrath got banned again? search is still down so someone tell me whats up

reason for ban: dupe account
date ban will be lifted: never

suspected as much.

Tasty · « **Reply #13607 on:** January 19, 2012, 04:59:48 PM »

Quote from: Count Drugula The Satanic on January 19, 2012, 04:39:47 PM

Quote from: Brobzoid on January 19, 2012, 10:41:55 AM
wrath got banned again? search is still down so someone tell me whats up

reason for ban: dupe account
date ban will be lifted: never

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #13608 on:** January 19, 2012, 10:57:46 PM »

Quote from: Count Drugula The Satanic on January 19, 2012, 04:39:47 PM

Quote from: Brobzoid on January 19, 2012, 10:41:55 AM
wrath got banned again? search is still down so someone tell me whats up

reason for ban: dupe account
date ban will be lifted: never

That's too bad and I have no idea why they're banning you over that now.

pilonv1 · « **Reply #13609 on:** January 19, 2012, 11:23:05 PM »

dupe accounts left: thousands

Shaka Khan · « **Reply #13610 on:** January 20, 2012, 12:28:15 AM »

I think you saw it coming, pal. Sometimes it felt like you were ~~asking~~ hoping you'd get caught. No subtlety whatsoever lol.

Cindi Mayweather · « **Reply #13611 on:** January 20, 2012, 12:29:40 AM »

He said Evilore was okay with it though.

Shaka Khan · « **Reply #13612 on:** January 20, 2012, 12:35:55 AM »

I'm out out of the loop, did he ask EL directly or are we going by Oscar's notes the other day?

Either way, I'm sure Wrath could find a new way in if he still cares about the place.

Brehvolution · « **Reply #13613 on:** January 20, 2012, 08:18:32 AM »

Next Wrath name on gaf:

Not Yazeed

archie4208 · « **Reply #13614 on:** January 20, 2012, 09:57:11 AM »

Meeru was kinda obvious about it

Funny thing, he has been harassing our Dota 2 inhouse games and being a giant dick in general. I'm pretty sure that is his 4th GAF account, too. I have no clue why he can't just let it go.

Momo · « **Reply #13615 on:** January 20, 2012, 10:48:06 AM »

Quote from: Oscar the Grouch on January 20, 2012, 09:54:13 AM

I think you were too obvious about it. However often it is waived, it's still a rule, and he generally isn't too good with people flaunting too openly about breaking rules. Hence how even I got banned a few times.

An admin should never get involved in moderation apart from rare occasions when there isnt another option. Administration and moderation is two entirely different things that needs skillsets as different as honey and salt.

Tasty · « **Reply #13616 on:** January 20, 2012, 11:34:02 AM »

Quote from: Oscar the Grouch on January 20, 2012, 09:54:13 AM

I think you were too obvious about it. However often it is waived, it's still a rule, and he generally isn't too good with people flaunting too openly about breaking rules. Hence how even I got banned a few times.

Really? For what?

Momo · « **Reply #13617 on:** January 20, 2012, 12:00:40 PM »

Quote from: Oscar the Grouch on January 20, 2012, 11:09:21 AM

Yeah, but on the other hand, it's his fucking website, so your argument is invalid.

I've been burnt before trying to moderate as an admin so I know how it is. Just encouraging good forum practice =L

Broseidon · « **Reply #13618 on:** January 20, 2012, 12:44:33 PM »

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=34421060#post34421060

Momo · « **Reply #13619 on:** January 20, 2012, 12:50:35 PM »

Two more turtles, splinter, shredder, crang and banana raincoat wearing bitch to go.

News:

Author Topic: The Official Psychoanalysis GAF Thread (Read 3488112 times)