Have a Question? V3

[mr quick]

 

Definitely the latter, because you would be lusting after a juvenile, undeveloped appearance.

I thought sleeping younger women was wrong because it could be conceived taking advantage, because they are not mentally mature enough to make wise decision, not because of their bodies being undeveloped.

Because I mean, theoretically you could meet an older woman say 24 and this time you know she's 24, she's a nice person, you like her, and decide you want to sleep with her because of this, but she has small breasts, skinny hips and features more befit of a 14 year old, but according to what you just said, it would be wrong because her body is that of a young girl, but it should be okay according to this moral compass that society seems to follow about maturity.

 

 

Well, by the way the question was defined, it would seem that the person looked preeminently 14, not a gray area as suggested now.

[Share Sharqi]

 

 

Definitely the latter, because you would be lusting after a juvenile, undeveloped appearance.

I thought sleeping younger women was wrong because it could be conceived taking advantage, because they are not mentally mature enough to make wise decision, not because of their bodies being undeveloped.

Because I mean, theoretically you could meet an older woman say 24 and this time you know she's 24, she's a nice person, you like her, and decide you want to sleep with her because of this, but she has small breasts, skinny hips and features more befit of a 14 year old, but according to what you just said, it would be wrong because her body is that of a young girl, but it should be okay according to this moral compass that society seems to follow about maturity.

 

 

Well, by the way the question was defined, it would seem that the person looked preeminently 14, not a gray area as suggested now.

 

Exactly, by the way it was originally defined, you couldn't know their ages, only being able to approximate based on their appearance. In the revised scenario where you know their ages the situation is reversed, the first is an immoral choice (and illegal) while the latter is legally sound although perhaps still questionable to the passive observer.

[LeakyLine]

I'm seeing some strange code in YouTube comments.

Can someone explain?

This is it.

u0001f3b6i

[Finn 7 five 11]

 

 

 

Definitely the latter, because you would be lusting after a juvenile, undeveloped appearance.

I thought sleeping younger women was wrong because it could be conceived taking advantage, because they are not mentally mature enough to make wise decision, not because of their bodies being undeveloped.

Because I mean, theoretically you could meet an older woman say 24 and this time you know she's 24, she's a nice person, you like her, and decide you want to sleep with her because of this, but she has small breasts, skinny hips and features more befit of a 14 year old, but according to what you just said, it would be wrong because her body is that of a young girl, but it should be okay according to this moral compass that society seems to follow about maturity.

 

 

Well, by the way the question was defined, it would seem that the person looked preeminently 14, not a gray area as suggested now.

 

Exactly, by the way it was originally defined, you couldn't know their ages, only being able to approximate based on their appearance. In the revised scenario where you know their ages the situation is reversed, the first is an immoral choice (and illegal) while the latter is legally sound although perhaps still questionable to the passive observer.

 

 

Yeah sorry, I kinda switched the tables unfairly, I am hungover so my train of thought is like an old man's urine stream.

 

Edit: Just to illustrate my point.

 

 

Edited April 3, 2015 by Finn 7 five 11

[Share Sharqi]

 

 

 

 

Definitely the latter, because you would be lusting after a juvenile, undeveloped appearance.

I thought sleeping younger women was wrong because it could be conceived taking advantage, because they are not mentally mature enough to make wise decision, not because of their bodies being undeveloped.

Because I mean, theoretically you could meet an older woman say 24 and this time you know she's 24, she's a nice person, you like her, and decide you want to sleep with her because of this, but she has small breasts, skinny hips and features more befit of a 14 year old, but according to what you just said, it would be wrong because her body is that of a young girl, but it should be okay according to this moral compass that society seems to follow about maturity.

 

 

Well, by the way the question was defined, it would seem that the person looked preeminently 14, not a gray area as suggested now.

 

Exactly, by the way it was originally defined, you couldn't know their ages, only being able to approximate based on their appearance. In the revised scenario where you know their ages the situation is reversed, the first is an immoral choice (and illegal) while the latter is legally sound although perhaps still questionable to the passive observer.

 

 

Yeah sorry, I kinda switched the tables unfairly, I am hungover so my train of thought is like an old man's urine stream.

 

 

 

Constant?

[mr quick]

That was a disturbing analogy. GL with the hangover. Down some black tea with honey, that's my personal favorite hangover drink.

[drifter.]

 

 

I just wanna play minecraft with shaders yo .

A laptop that will run Minecraft with shaders (and I'm assuming you want Sonic Ether's ultimate shaders) at an acceptable framerate will most likely cost you a lot. You're better off building a PC for that.

Eh with my Samsung, I was able to play Skyrim with mods on bearable settings.

[feckyerlife]

 

 

 

 

Actual I don't regret it. I was being targeted by feminazis and white knights on that account.

If you use the words "feminazis" and "white knights" seriously you probably deserved it.

 

 

Nothing wrong with the word "white knights"

 

unless it involves the klan

 

 

Not true either

 

People in the KKK don't ride horses and raid houses anymore. I'm sorry that you're still stuck in the films and the stereotypical thought that every white supremacist hates black people and foreign people just because of their skin and ethnicity

 

that is true that they dont ride horses anymore, but they are called "The White Knights of The Klu Klux Klan"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Knights_of_the_Ku_Klux_Klan

 

then what are white supremacist?

Edited April 3, 2015 by feckyerlife

[AboveAndBeyoncé]

Anyone going to see furious 7 today?

[feckyerlife]

no it will make me depressed.

[AboveAndBeyoncé]

no it will make me depressed.

Same here I miss Paul Walker

But I still might go and see it

Edited April 3, 2015 by AboveAndBeyoncé

[AlienTwo]

 

 

 

"Literally". They always say it when they mean precisely the opposite.

It will always bother me that the informal definition of 'literally' is 'not literally'

 

Absolutely. There are so many other words, but they had to go and corrupt the one word that is used to signify "not metaphorically". What the hell...

 

No wonder they say English is one of the most difficult languages to learn, as a second language

 

They literally changed the dictionary definition of the word in order to fit with the mis-used definitions. So I am not wrong when I say "Literally my head exploded when I heard that."

 

And that folks, is the saddest truth I have thought about today.

 

Definition of LITERALLY

1: in a literal sense or manner : actually <took the remark literally> <was literally insane>

2: in effect : virtually <will literally turn the world upside down to combat cruelty or injustice — Norman Cousins>

 

Source:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally

[feckyerlife]

 

no it will make me depressed.

Same here I miss Paul Walker

But I still might go and see it

 

i dont miss paul walker, it will make me miss the my race cars lol

[mr quick]

Ugh. When I first heard that from you, Alien, it literally killed me.

[AlienTwo]

Ugh. When I first heard that from you, Alien, it literally killed me.

And I literally ripped all my hair out and smashed my computer.

[drifter.]

 

 

Ugh. When I first heard that from you, Alien, it literally killed me.

And I literally ripped all my hair out and smashed my computer.I mean well the thing is, I think the dictionary evolves with human language.

 

Like could you imagine if we tried to talk to people way back then? They'd take most of what we said very literally.

 

Like , "yea she's my hot babe" would confuse many people"

 

And another scary throught, maybe in 10-20 years we'll see a new definition added to the dictionary

 

"Bae" Noun. -Abbrv. Babe, Baby, etc.

see Baby

 

Baby. noun. - 1. An extremely young human, yada yada

2. An affectionate term for one's signifigant other. Or something like that.

I remember being surprised seeing "Ain't" put in the dictionary.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Majesticnug420

[AlienTwo]

Yes, and that makes sense, but adding slang and new definitions for words that make a bit of logical sense is one thing, but changing the definition of a word because people are uneducated about it's proper use seems just so much worse somehow. It would be like calling countries totally different things in English than their true name because we can't be bothered with- uh.... I guess we do that too.

[feckyerlife]

 

 

Ugh. When I first heard that from you, Alien, it literally killed me.

And I literally ripped all my hair out and smashed my computer.

I mean well the thing is, I think the dictionary evolves with human language.

 

Like could you imagine if we tried to talk to people way back then? They'd take most of what we said very literally.

 

Like , "yea she's my hot babe" would confuse many people"

 

And another scary throught, maybe in 10-20 years we'll see a new definition added to the dictionary

 

"Bae" Noun. -Abbrv. Babe, Baby, etc.

see Baby

 

Baby. noun. - 1. An extremely young human, yada yada

2. An affectionate term for one's signifigant other. Or something like that.

I remember being surprised seeing "Ain't" put in the dictionary.

 

no, thats what urbandictionary.com is for

[Fonz]

Yes, and that makes sense, but adding slang and new definitions for words that make a bit of logical sense is one thing, but changing the definition of a word because people are uneducated about it's proper use seems just so much worse somehow. It would be like calling countries totally different things in English than their true name because we can't be bothered with- uh.... I guess we do that too.

100% subscribed. The "literally" issue is particularly bad because the whole reason that word exists is to separate things from figurative meanings. I realise language is a convention, but that's like using the word "white" when you actually mean "black"...

[AlienTwo]

 

Yes, and that makes sense, but adding slang and new definitions for words that make a bit of logical sense is one thing, but changing the definition of a word because people are uneducated about it's proper use seems just so much worse somehow. It would be like calling countries totally different things in English than their true name because we can't be bothered with- uh.... I guess we do that too.

100% subscribed. The "literally" issue is particularly bad because the whole reason that word exists is to separate things from figurative meanings. I realise language is a convention, but that's like using the word "white" when you actually mean "black"...

 

I know. Changing the definition of that word was a very smart move.

 

In this case, I'm adjusting the definition of "smart" to "dumb." A cromulant move in my mind, one that imbiggens us all.

[Andreaz1]

Anyone going to see furious 7 today?

Saw it yesterday, I really liked it.

 

 

If you temporarily forget everything you knew about the laws of physics, but that's been the same since the franchise started

 

 

Definitely worth watching though, and a very nice tribute to Walker at the end I feel.

[*MURDOC*]

no it will make me depressed.

 

Seeing something that terrible and knowing I wasted money on it would make me depressed too.

 

And Paul Walker sucked.

[Eram]

Anyone going to see furious 7 today?

Not talking about Star Wars, I guess?...

 

FFS, there're 7 FF?!

Not even checking for some free download of it...

Edited April 3, 2015 by EramVerdes

[mr quick]

My eye is making a strange squeaking sound (which was audible on a video recording), should I be worried?

[Crokey]

Which route should I take?

 

A OR B ?

 

A.

Via Yorkshire

B.

Via Lancashire

Option B. If you go with Option A, the M62 can be pain the arse, and depending on the time of day you'll get caught up in heavy traffic in Manchester and then Leeds. Where as with Option A, you'll only have the interchange at Warrington to contend with, although you won't have the risk of the Thelwall Viaduct to contend with, after that it's straight forward.

[krashr]

A cromulent move in my mind, one that embiggens us all.

 

 

ftfy =) one should try not to use words incromulently

[PhillBellic]

Since one of my last questions was overlooked, has The GTA Network ever conducted a Census?

[Coin]

Why would it?

[PhillBellic]

Why would it?

I'm curious about the demographics.

[AboveAndBeyoncé]

 

Why would it?

I'm curious about the demographics. That would be pretty cool