Jimmy
Feb 15 2007, 03:22 PM
QUOTE (Ghouleh @ Feb 15 2007, 09:15 AM)

Ah, those images always cheer me up in a -27C morning.
Yeah, it's about -24C here. God hates Minnesota. Or maybe just me, and he's punishing the rest of the state for harboring me. Haven't decided yet.
Ghouleh
Feb 15 2007, 03:23 PM
Hm, where in Minnesota do you live?
Jimmy
Feb 15 2007, 03:24 PM
QUOTE (Ghouleh @ Feb 15 2007, 09:23 AM)

Hm, where in Minnesota do you live?
St. Paul
Kayhynn
Feb 15 2007, 04:36 PM
It was -17 C here this morning.
But its supposed to warm up tomorrow....a balmy 0C for the high.
Chevisbohunkly
Feb 15 2007, 04:42 PM
ISN'T THAT LIKE 32F??? OHH YAY THAT SNOWING TEMPERATURE
Gunslinger
Feb 15 2007, 04:42 PM
QUOTE (Kayhynn @ Feb 15 2007, 11:36 AM)

It was -17 C here this morning.
But its supposed to warm up tomorrow....a balmy 0C for the high.
I can't take too much coldness. X.x
Good thing I live in Miami.
Ghislord
Feb 15 2007, 04:43 PM
-17C is 1.4 F 0C is 32F
Kayhynn
Feb 15 2007, 04:44 PM
Well I was looking at the clock tower that has the degrees.
This morning it said....-2F...then -17C.
Sooooooo
anonymityisbest
Feb 15 2007, 06:35 PM
oh yea i know...
lolz sucks for yall.....
i live in sunny cali where the norm is 70 F and we start to bitch when it drops below 65...
spyderjaxon
Feb 15 2007, 07:16 PM

yeah, I live in southern Florida, so we got nothing compared to the -temps you have.
on a different note:

I lost it for 15 min. or more. I couldn't get back in to the forums! I had it set to remember me, so I haven't logged in since I made my account and could not freakin' remember my username! The great admins will surely smite me for my desperate plea for aid as I have bothered them for naught. As I did finally get it right... It doesn't seem right that such a simple thing should bug me so bad but...it did.
Thank you for your help in getting me back on.
anonymityisbest
Feb 15 2007, 07:20 PM
hahahahahahaha....ahw god thats funny...
spyderjaxon
Feb 15 2007, 07:24 PM
"Waahh!" You laugh at my pain!
Why?
Ghislord
Feb 15 2007, 07:25 PM
Because it's fun to poke at the painfully challenged? Duh!
Jimmy
Feb 15 2007, 07:25 PM
QUOTE (spyderjaxon @ Feb 15 2007, 01:24 PM)

"Waahh!" You laugh at my pain!
Why?

Because it's funny. And tasty.
anonymityisbest
Feb 15 2007, 07:38 PM
umm who doesnt laugh at pain...?
spyderjaxon
Feb 15 2007, 07:42 PM
yes, yes, so happy to amuse you.
::bows to all::
Take full enjoyment from my pain.
Kayhynn
Feb 15 2007, 08:18 PM
If I was issuing the pain I'd take more enjoyment in it.......
what?
Jimmy
Feb 15 2007, 09:20 PM
QUOTE (Kayhynn @ Feb 15 2007, 02:18 PM)

If I was issuing the pain I'd take more enjoyment in it.......
what?
You're a little scary sometimes, crazy lady. That's all.
Kayhynn
Feb 15 2007, 09:31 PM
I do my best. Is it working? Have i scared you all into submission yet?
Ghislord
Feb 15 2007, 09:34 PM
QUOTE (Kayhynn @ Feb 15 2007, 04:31 PM)

I do my best. Is it working? Have i scared you all into submission yet?
It's Either that or scared into arousal... bet you can guess which one
Verbose
Feb 15 2007, 09:39 PM
QUOTE (TheGrubz @ Feb 15 2007, 12:42 PM)

you no, maybe I should obey the mods, the thought of unlubed rape kinda scares me
..."maybe"?
QUOTE (Kayhynn @ Feb 16 2007, 08:31 AM)

I do my best. Is it working? Have i scared you all into submission yet?
I'm a little turned on, to be honest.
Kayhynn
Feb 15 2007, 09:40 PM
Wait...is this the same guy saying he's asexual now saying he's getting turned on?
O.o
Verbose
Feb 15 2007, 10:09 PM
But of course! Neither gender attracts me. Doesn't mean I don't have a sex drive.
A very perverted one, I'll have you know.
TheGrubz
Feb 15 2007, 10:22 PM
yea, he's like an amoeba, he just sits up there in his room and splits, over and over and over
Kayhynn
Feb 15 2007, 10:35 PM
QUOTE (Verbose @ Feb 15 2007, 04:09 PM)

But of course! Neither gender attracts me. Doesn't mean I don't have a sex drive.
A very perverted one, I'll have you know.
*snicker*
You are on your way to greatness young padawan
Verbose
Feb 15 2007, 10:48 PM
QUOTE (TheGrubz @ Feb 16 2007, 09:22 AM)

yea, he's like an amoeba, he just sits up there in his room and splits, over and over and over
I've had this discussion so many times...
I am not asexual in the scientific sense of the word, but rather the social sense which is used to denote what could be roughly described as the opposite of a bisexual person.
Heterosexual People are attracted to the opposite gender.
Homosexual People are attracted to their own gender.
Bisexual People are attracted to both genders.
Asexual People are attracted to neither gender.
Go on, taste it. It's delicious.
QUOTE (Kayhynn @ Feb 16 2007, 09:35 AM)

*snicker*
You are on your way to greatness young padawan
On my way?
shiosk
Feb 15 2007, 11:38 PM
I could me wrong, but I think the opposite of bisexual would be like monosexual or something. Asexual mean you have no gender and are perfectly capable of making babies without any outside help.
This frightens me.
diat
Feb 15 2007, 11:43 PM
a·sex·u·al (ā-sěk'shōō-əl) Pronunciation Key
adj.
1) Having no evident sex or sex organs; sexless.
2) Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction that occurs without the union of male and female gametes, as in binary fission or budding.
3) Lacking interest in or desire for sex.
Your both right. Have a cookie.
3VIL_L337
Feb 16 2007, 12:27 AM
Dammit i want a cookie.
Oh wait!
I have over 5k from Grubz. And the Belguims.
Verbose
Feb 16 2007, 12:38 AM
QUOTE (shiosk @ Feb 16 2007, 10:38 AM)

I could me wrong, but I think the opposite of bisexual would be like monosexual or something. Asexual mean you have no gender and are perfectly capable of making babies without any outside help.
No, that's the scientific meaning. Asexual is used because we don't have another word to mean that one is not attracted to males or females. If we made one up, without changing the three other words of this type, we'd end up with asexual because that'd be the closest we could get in the Latin.
And monosexual would be someone attracted only to themself. I think I'm remembering that right. Been a while since I did any Latin.
Also, I'm working on that baby thing.
QUOTE (diat @ Feb 16 2007, 10:43 AM)

a·sex·u·al (ā-sěk'shōō-əl) Pronunciation Key
adj.
1) Having no evident sex or sex organs; sexless.
2) Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction that occurs without the union of male and female gametes, as in binary fission or budding.
3) Lacking interest in or desire for sex.
Your both right. Have a cookie.
A dictionary doesn't tell you what a word means, it tells you what enough people think it means. For the most part, the two match up but people frequently use words the "wrong" way (like the people I want to punch in the throat; the ones who use literally to mean a lot) or they use an old word for a new concept (manufacture literally means hand-made in Latin) and the dictionaries are usually years behind the curve in listing the newer meaning.
This has two reasons; a) it avoids slang that comes into vogue and fades out in a short time and

people are elitist snobs when it comes to the language, treating a dictionary like a holy book of words.
Think you might be one of those elitist snobs? Ask yourself if you think burnsauce should be in a dictionary. Not a slang dictionary, but the Oxford or something.
spyderjaxon
Feb 16 2007, 02:27 AM
honestly, I don't even know what that is...
Verbose
Feb 16 2007, 02:33 AM
It was the first word I could think of that wasn't a filthy sexual position and/or act.
3VIL_L337
Feb 16 2007, 03:24 AM
Congrats!
You had your first non-perv thought!
Heres a cookie!
ENJOY!
Verbose
Feb 16 2007, 03:59 AM
I have lots of non-perv thoughts. If I don't, they all blur together and I like my deviancy to be sharp and in focus.
Jimmy
Feb 16 2007, 02:46 PM
QUOTE (Verbose @ Feb 15 2007, 06:38 PM)

And monosexual would be someone attracted only to themself. I think I'm remembering that right. Been a while since I did any Latin.
Nah, it'd be more like there was only one person/thing you were attracted to. So instead of ALL women, just Rae-Rae. Or something like that.
QUOTE (Verbose @ Feb 15 2007, 06:38 PM)

A dictionary doesn't tell you what a word means, it tells you what enough people think it means.
That is the most...brilliant...thing I think I've ever read, on the web or off.
Verbose
Feb 16 2007, 03:04 PM
QUOTE (Jimmy @ Feb 17 2007, 01:46 AM)

Nah, it'd be more like there was only one person/thing you were attracted to. So instead of ALL women, just Rae-Rae. Or something like that.
I think we need to find a manusexual. Someone sexually attracted to [their] hands.
QUOTE (Jimmy @ Feb 17 2007, 01:46 AM)

That is the most...brilliant...thing I think I've ever read, on the web or off.
It's basic linguistics. Words have no intrinsic meaning, they mean what we think they do. When enough people agree on enough words, you have a language. It's why my plan to have a language of nothing but sexy failed.
Jimmy
Feb 16 2007, 03:09 PM
QUOTE (Verbose @ Feb 16 2007, 09:04 AM)

It's basic linguistics. Words have no intrinsic meaning, they mean what we think they do. When enough people agree on enough words, you have a language.
I understand that. It's the fact that you were trying to draw a distinction between what words "really mean" and what "enough people think they mean", that struck me as so retar... err... profound.
Verbose
Feb 16 2007, 03:13 PM
My point was that pulling up a dictionary for the definition of a word has limited use, especially with Internets.
Most dictionaries in print wouldn't acknowledge the word "asexual" in the sense that I use it. Doesn't mean that it doesn't have that meaning, it just means that the dictionary editors haven't chosen to acknowledge or are unaware of that particular word. Since I didn't coin the word and only started using it after seeing it used in several different places (to avoid the very long explanation I'd been using up until then), I feel fully justified in lecturing.
Especially since I've yet to make the claim and not have at least one person say something like, "hurrrrrrr you can make babies on your own? hurrrrrrrr".
Edit: And for the record, I do believe words have meanings. I believe it very strongly. I just don't believe that the meaning is intrinsic to the word, it's something we imbue particular sounds and symbols with. My argument was just that we, that is most people (if not all), use words or use words in ways that aren't found in a dictionary. This doesn't make them wrong. Just hard to prove.
LadyJericho
Feb 16 2007, 07:45 PM
What in the blue hell is burnsauce?!?!?
TheGrubz
Feb 16 2007, 09:28 PM
a sauce that burns...duh...
anonymityisbest
Feb 17 2007, 12:08 AM
ahaha you dont know how odd thic thread is.
im just trying to catch up and seeing that this is physically impossible...
WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!oneone1
anonymityisbest
Feb 17 2007, 12:18 AM
i dont think the mods will appreciate that dude....
LadyJericho
Feb 17 2007, 01:22 AM
I always wonder why ppl think spam works....
I3lind
Feb 17 2007, 01:27 AM
Now the only question is, is any one stupid enough to klick one?
Verbose
Feb 17 2007, 05:21 AM
If the question is, "Is anybody stupid enough to..." the answer is invariably yes.
Legato
Feb 17 2007, 08:56 AM
Now now. Don't feed the spammers... and don't make me double edit everything 
G!Nicole Kidman? Wow, they need to work on their advertising becuase that was NOT tempting.
Verbose
Feb 17 2007, 09:01 AM
Click now! See a rake with a red wig perform oral sex! Who may or may not have testicles in place of ovaries!
Ballscratch
Feb 17 2007, 10:51 AM
With an advertising campaign like that, how could I resist!?
Verbose
Feb 17 2007, 11:04 AM
Excellent. My fiendish plan is coming to fruition.
Ballscratch
Feb 17 2007, 12:34 PM
You sick puppy!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.