Missing large

Schadenfreude Free

My name is ironic because I actually hate seeing other people suffer. I’m a high school sophomore. Favorite color:Green Favorite pet:rabbit Political orientation:content to watch everyone suffer. Politics are the exception to my name rule Gender:Male Favorite comic: Either Calvin and Hobbes or Pearls Before Swine Favorite movie/TV series: Clone wars s7/the simpsons Favorite ice cream flavor: Chocolate chip cookie dough Favorite school subject:History/English Dream occupation: Professional Actor/College Professor. But since that will never happen I’ll probably end up as an insurance salesman and regret my past life decisions.

Recent Comments

  1. 14 days ago on FoxTrot

    I’m sorry if this was taken as a sarcastic statement, I didn’t mean it that way. I genuinely think that your knowledge is something very amazing and you should keep sharing it:)

  2. 15 days ago on Big Nate

    Thank you Carson. Glad to see you’re back.

  3. 16 days ago on Life on Earth

    Deep sigh. I did not say the nyt was biased. I said that some of the news sources you used were notoriously right-wing biased. Also, trying to distract me away from my original point that you have an argument with various fallacies with the Alcoff allegations is frankly absurd. Many of the sources you have cited are Twitter posts, and you clearly have created an echo chamber for yourself. Additionally, the fact you keep saying “we’re done here” as soon as you start losing the argument is very confusing. You would also do well not to mistakenly criticize my sources and provide me with an actual argument rather than dodging around my questions. Also the fact you would slander a group whose primary focus is to end fascism in all forms is very disturbing. And before you go into a delusional rant about how the riots are destroying our cities and antifa’s trying to take the government down, I might remind you that the majority of the protestors are peaceful and the ones who are violent are the non-affiliated(the looters and the scumbags who have nothing to do with issues and are only there to capitalize on anarchy) and the white supremacists themselves. I might also add that your FB pages that you cited belong to groups of people who believe in the Antifa ideology and choose to coordinate at times, but are not part of a nationwide, centralized organization.

  4. 17 days ago on Life on Earth

    Derisive arguments not aimed to convince only weaken your position. Also I would suggest using websites and news articles that are not notoriously biased against any liberal/democrat policy to support your already mediocre argument. Typing 3 lines of over exaggerated laughter sounds makes you look like you do not know what you are talking about.

  5. 27 days ago on Life on Earth

    It’s definitely football. Make sure more sense than American football.

  6. about 1 month ago on FoxTrot

    Understood, I concede defeat. Also, I believe that Elaphe Gutatta has changed his/her username since this conversation began, so I apologize for any confusion this may have caused

  7. about 1 month ago on Big Nate

    Telling Carson to stop picking words and phrases off of the internet and then doing that yourself is the very definition of hypocrisy and the root of why your argument has failed so spectacularly. Carson, while I too become annoyed with his corrections at times, has made reasonable and well-supported points, and his article on circular reasoning, should you choose to read it(though I doubt you will) should prove a better lens to see yourself through than your own mirror.

  8. about 1 month ago on Big Nate

    Why do you capitalize every single word

  9. about 1 month ago on FoxTrot

    (Cont) with the stereotype that boomers can not operate technology and are all bitter, nostalgic curmudgeons who believe everything was better back in their day. In doing this, I was pointing out the truth to his argument: that he is guilty of the very same thing he accused me of. Now while I know the “hypocrite” argument is rather spiteful and petty, in this case it has merit because the accuser has done the very thing you are currently accusingly me of, the ad hominem argument. That specific argument strategy is also tastelessness and petty, and the fact you call me out on it(wrongly I might add, though I concede you may have been deprived of a few key aforementioned details) while accepting the argument of Mr. boxo taco croco, opens up the possibility that you may be biased in your argument.

  10. about 1 month ago on FoxTrot

    First of all, I believe you have misunderstood way slang works. Slang is usually employed as a sort of witticism to convey meaning some of words that would otherwise be too long or simply “not popular” in the eyes of today’s youth. For example, if I were to talk to one of my peers, instead of saying “Yes, I was sitting at home perusing my collection of favorite contemporary rap music pieces” which would likely be met with confusion and perhaps even ridicule, I would say “I was just vibing to some rap.” Internet slang works in a similar way. As most internet/phone users have realized by now(assumption based on the interactions I see daily with my friends) that text abbreviations are necessitated at some times when the receiver is in a hurry, or when an elongated response is unnecessary. An example of this would be: Say your wife is texting you regarding the whereabouts of your child at a large social gathering(perhaps a fair.) Say your wife is worried and anxious, and demands an immediate response. Instead of saying. “I am located by the Ferris wheel with the child, and we are going to the cotton candy stand, It is all right, we will be fine.” This is obviously inconvenient, and especially if you have someplace to be, time consuming. Thus, the abbreviated “slang” for such a message would be: “At Ferris wheel with kid, we r going 2 candy stand. Don’t wry, we’ll be OK.” Now that I have established that piece of informations perhaps your attention could be brought to the fact that perhaps the argument that you described as “ad hominem” was a way of pointing out the bias in his statement; he assumed I was a millennial and thereby made an ad hominem argument. In calling him a boomer, I was attempting to show him the fallacy in his assumption that I was a millennial. I was aIso pointing this out by countering his stereotype that millennials are all inconsiderate, spoiled children who have no respect for the past(which I do believe has some merit, mind you.)