Play
Multi-Player
Coins
Community
Settings
Help
Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to Off-topic Forum   

Posts 1 - 20 of 20   
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 03:56:54

[FEL]Chatul
Level 22
Report
We welcome anyone except for:
1.Racists. Defined as haters of any particular ancestry-based group. We do not condone any form of racism, including the so-called reverse racism. KKK and Nation of Islam members do not need to apply.
2.Trolls. We do not accept extreme views that are not serious.
3.People that law enforcement goes after. No terrorism etc is allowed.
4.People with anti-Jewish sentiment.

We can do a group chat somewhere.:-) It is fine if you support Clinton or Trump or any other normal person, just not Osama bin Laden, Hitler, Stalin or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. It is fine no matter whether you are religious or secular. However civil and rational discussions are expected from everyone (no irrational militant atheist for example).

Edited 10/6/2016 03:59:51
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 03:59:20


Bane 
Level 59
Report
pfft. no discord channel?

at least the child had one.
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:00:08

[FEL]Chatul
Level 22
Report
^We can try to do one somewhere.:-)
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:03:25


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report


Edited 10/6/2016 04:04:09
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:03:43


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
3.People that law enforcement goes after

Barbers and food sellers without licenses beware! Tabby hates you and doesn't want you here. You're scum, the government deserves a cut!
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:04:19


Zenvue
Level 54
Report
What if you like Stalin but you do not support him entirely?
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:04:44


Bubsy 3D
Level 39
Report
Random dudes selling food without passing any sort of inspection, What could possibly go wrong?
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:06:00

[FEL]Chatul
Level 22
Report
^That's not good. I mean Stalin was one of the worst humans that have ever existed on Planet Earth. I would have enjoyed a cup of Russian tea with Leon Trotsky if I lived in 1900 despite not agreeing with him but I could not have endured Stalin. I can tolerate true believers of crazy things as long as they do not go violent (such as Trotsky before armed communism). However I can not tolerate real tyrants.

Edited 10/6/2016 04:08:10
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:41:41


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
It is fine if you support Clinton or Trump or any other normal person, just not Osama bin Laden, Hitler, Stalin or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.


Uphold these authoritarian killers-to-be scumbags

not these ones. I bet if you compare the death count of Oosama Laden and Obama/Clinton/Trump, the Americans would kill more each year.

The rest of this is very seen in how just spastic it is.

Edited 10/6/2016 04:50:50
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 04:41:41


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report


Edited 10/6/2016 04:57:42
- downvoted post by Wally Balls
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 16:23:16


[WL] Colonel Harthacanute
Level 50
Report
Stalin needs to commit suicide immediately.
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 19:02:50


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
Random dudes selling food without passing any sort of inspection, What could possibly go wrong?

Little, if you poison your customers, you're likely to have no customers soon from flight. Plus do you honestly believe that the only thing stopping folk who want to serve poison food is the government? If they existed, they could poison food not being served to government inspectors.
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 20:21:43


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
if you poison your customers, you're likely to have no customers soon from flight.


tsh it's not needingly as easy as that.

*clinically addictive foods
*untraced source of poison

and even then, the hurt is done.

If they existed, they could poison food not being served to government inspectors.


Haha don't you think they would have thought of that? No, what the problem is bribing the inspectors. But yeah this is solved by making random picks to get a more average example.
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/6/2016 23:20:58


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
tsh it's not needingly as easy as that.

*clinically addictive foods
*untraced source of poison


Putting addictives in food is doubtful to work. The customers are unlikely to know that your food was what caused them to be happy, and before someone says it's the same with poison, well it's pretty different. If you die, and other folk are dying, and you all ate at the same place, it's pretty obvious what the source is. Also untraced source of poison is a little vague, and if multiple folk are dying and they all ate from the same place, it's pretty clear what happened.

Haha don't you think they would have thought of that?

Doubtful, the number of folk who want to kill random folk and also know how to cook AND also think that this would be a good plan is pretty low most likely. Probably not zero, but defintely not high.
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/7/2016 06:02:48


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
The customers are unlikely to know that your food was what caused them to be happy


Yes, there are drugs with an awaited takeout like that, but that's irrelevant. Folk know what they're addicted to, that's the very meaning of "addiction" - a medic mind illness where folk do too much of what they shouldn't do (too much of) but feel good or satisfied by it.

it's the same with poison, well it's pretty different. If you die, and other folk are dying, and you all ate at the same place


Most common foodbourne illnesses don't kill folk, especially in developed countries like America. Out of 582 million cases of food poisoning in 2010, 351k (0,06%) led to death.

It's also not needingly systemic nor consistent. And it's much harder than just that.
https://www.foodsafety.gov/blog/complexmystery.html.

It's fine to wield critic thinking sometimes, but stow it away until after you read and understand the knowing.

you all ate at the same place, it's pretty obvious what the source is.


without a first guess in mind to test, it's all very unscientific, this is called data dredging. Who knows the cartloads of things that you eat in a well-to-do land each day. Most folk eat at more than one seller of food each day. And most folk don't write down everything they eat, either.

the number of folk who want to kill random folk and also know how to cook


this isn't about wanting. No, food illnesses are accidents that cooks can make even if they cook it fully to standards.
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/7/2016 23:31:38


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
without a first guess in mind to test, it's all very unscientific, this is called data dredging. Who knows the cartloads of things that you eat in a well-to-do land each day. Most folk eat at more than one seller of food each day. And most folk don't write down everything they eat, either.

If ten folk ate at three places each in a week, and one they all shared, and the place was dirty and all that, they're pretty likely to complain about that and talk about how they and others caught something.

Most common foodbourne illnesses don't kill folk, especially in developed countries like America. Out of 582 million cases of food poisoning in 2010, 351k (0,06%) led to death.

this isn't about wanting. No, food illnesses are accidents that cooks can make even if they cook it fully to standards.


In my experience, most folk jump to folk wanting to poison others as the first thing when talking about deregulating food places. Anyway, a regulatory body can exist without a government, they give out regulations to meet and if you meet them, they approve of you, and that draws folk to your store because it's approved by a commission. They might not have the power to gaol folk for being bad or being dirty, but is that even a good power?
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/7/2016 23:58:37


DerWyyy
Level 55
Report
alts
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/8/2016 05:10:15


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
If ten folk ate at three places each in a week, and one they all shared, and the place was dirty and all that, they're pretty likely to complain about that and talk about how they and others caught something.


Did you not read what I already tapped? I don't mean no offence but I just said that (almost all cases of foodbourne illnesses today, anyway) are not systemic or consistent. A parasite can crawl into one fish and not another. Even when government checks for sources of outbreaks, commun sellers of food to those who have akin symptoms, it meets big blocks:
*just forgetting or misremembering
*many shared foods
*many spawners
*unrelated (to food illness) spawners of the same symptoms

Also you take your food from more than just three sellers each day, you seem to be just talking about hut kind of eatings. It's wanting to buy cans without bugs in it and other foods. Grocery, as they're called.

Let's also not forget about carcinogens (most often in foods, pesticides) and gene-engineered foods, which can take much longer to noticeably manifest, if it does at all.

a regulatory body can exist without a government, they give out regulations to meet and if you meet them, they approve of you, and that draws folk to your store because it's approved by a commission.


That's the way I think the government should be doing, making them have a noticeable score of some kind.

But anyhow, you'd think that food safety would be the same everywhere then, don't you think? It's awful in Thailand and good in Belarus. Also not to say the bribing of these "independent" scorers as well. And that's generally not what happens with things without regulation, that they still get noticeable "independent" regulation. See pretty much any black market.

Not to say that it's way easier to bribe independent.

they approve of you, and that draws folk to your store because it's approved by a commission.


Independent studies and reviews don't have much effet on advertising. It's quite a narrow hold that they would sway over - most are drawn more by seeing good things and happy folk, and the few who think through it logically would rightfully come to the endsay that it was a paid self-promotion.

They might not have the power to gaol folk for being bad or being dirty


Again you exaggerate what the government does. In most governments that care, you'd likely just have the store shut down, and maybe fined.

Edited 10/8/2016 05:11:39
WL non-alt-right discussion: 10/8/2016 18:57:19


OxTheAutist 
Level 58
Report
I'll repeat. We don't want you here.
Posts 1 - 20 of 20   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Challenge Friends, Win Money | Skill Game | Terms of Service