Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 2)

[Eric Cartman]

Doesn't he realize he could create such a scene in his own home right now with his action figures?

AND TAKE THEM OUT OF THE ORIGINAL PACKAGING?!?!?!?

[Eric Cartman]

We're at this point:

Far be it for me to impugn the reputation of this definitely legitmate organisation, but I find it slightly strange they would use the footnote of their press release to encourage people to pirate an upcoming TV show when it comes out

[kaleidoscopium]

That HBO Harry Potter show is going to make so much money and they’re going to absolutely meltdown over it. Gonna be a great year for content 🥹

[Eric Cartman]

Valens shouldn’t have been fired for reporting an actual news but he didn’t help himself.

I guess it depends on whether you consider it YET ANOTHER example of them using their journalistic platform to promote their personal business interests AGAIN.

[kaleidoscopium]

Let's see, everyone in here knows full well what the in story context for the nickname is, but they acknowledge the double meaning without anyone being confused.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dankruto/comments/hvm8i4/unapologetically_pervy/

Acknowledgement of how wild the nickname sounds out of context (13 years ago).

https://www.reddit.com/r/Naruto/comments/12408w/hope_you_all_took_this_out_of_context_like_i_did/

Urban Dictionary

Urban Dictionary: Sucker
Sucker: That dude believes [everything] he hears and says but has no clue about what is [actually] [happening].
sucker.urbanup.com sucker.urbanup.com

A person that has been tricked into something.
A gullible person.

Also Urban Dictionary acknowledging the sexual connotation on the same page.

Urban Dictionary: Sucker
Sucker: That dude believes [everything] he hears and says but has no clue about what is [actually] [happening].
sucker.urbanup.com sucker.urbanup.com

A person who loves to suck on a penis because that's whats up. (13 year old post, didn't even make it about gender)


But I'm a trolling liar that makes shit up and I need to admit that I'm wrong.

OP made a retarded post, comes back after the weekend to continue bitching about it. Still developing  

https://www.resetera.com/threads/as-much-flak-as-people-give-english-dubs-they-really-didnt-have-to-be-so-literal-with-some-translations-tsunades-nickname-in-naruto.1248261/page-5#post-142908980

[Jansen]

Fucking dumbass weebs

[Eric Cartman]

I couldn't care less about these games, but i just heavy dislike Visa or MasterCard telling me what i can't spend my own money on.

And the same goes for these Safety Act Online laws such the ones in the UK and Texas. Would rather get a free VPN cause i'm not showing anyone my ID card.

I agree that payment processors shouldn't be the arbiters or hold more power than actual fucking courts do as to what is and is not legal.

I disagree that there shouldn't be more (as in fucking some) effort made to prevent children havign unfettered access to the fucking degeneracy the unfiltered internet provides, because holy shit, I've been on the internet

My major issue with how online verificatrions are being handled is primarily a technical implementation issue - there is no fucking need to provide a government ID to prove age, when it would be vastly easier all round to just be able to say "I don't want age restrictions thanks" to your ISP, who probably already offers a host of age control features as standard.

[Besticus Maximus]

I don't see what's stopping anyone from starting GOG for their weeaboo porn games

[nachobro]

grimy orgasm games 

[Taco Bell Tower]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/so-sony-really-developed-only-4-ps5-exclusives-this-gen.1248345/post-142892919

You can't just come and criticize PlayStation on reseteradotcom bruh. Praying for your inbox right now 🙏

User banned (1 week): Admittedly trolling over multiple posts

[Boredfrom]

I don't see what's stopping anyone from starting GOG for their weeaboo porn games

There are. For better or worse, Steam gives you more sales.

BTW, having your own store will not save you of the payment processors trying to screw you over if the cat ladies decide to target you.

[Potato]

Moral issues around credit card companies imposing censorship aside, I think we can all agree that every single person who makes and buys these games should be put against the wall, right?

[Jansen]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/as-much-flak-as-people-give-english-dubs-they-really-didnt-have-to-be-so-literal-with-some-translations-tsunades-nickname-in-naruto.1248261/page-5#post-142911920

Locked 

[Eric Cartman]

There are. For better or worse, Steam gives you more sales.

BTW, having your own store will not save you of the payment processors trying to screw you over if the cat ladies decide to target you.

in 2025 there are numerous ways to purchase things online without going via a credit card purchase.
Online purchases made via credit cards are normie payment methods to remove any friction regarding fraud, scams, etc and make things as close to going into a real shop as possible.

But even pre-internet if your sexual proclivities were too spicy for the mainstream, you weren't just going to a specialist shop to acquire them, you were probably having an awkward conversation with the shopkeeper if they even catered to your extra spicy tastes. They weren't just on the fucking new releases shelf at blockbuster.

So - and I hope you'll acknowledge I have literally never pulled the 'you like anim pedo' card on you, or ever implied as such - I'd just like to unpack what your specific concerns are, because I think there's a whole bunch of different things at play here.

Is it the power credit card companies have?
If so, I agree, but also there's a lot more I'd like people to scrutinise about the fucking credit card companies first, starting with predatory targetting of financially vulnerable people, usorious interest rates, and somehow being exempt from clearing debts from victims of bankrupcy, all of which are way more fucked up to just get a pass on, and if the ideal scenario here is credit card companies need a lot more fucking government oversight as to how they conduct their business, then yes, I agree.

Is it that as a de facto online currency, they should process all payemnst no questions asked?
If so, no, I absolutely reject that notion, and it should be fairly obvious why.

Is it an absolutist free speech stance, that all created works are a form of expression, and should therefore not have any interference regarding their propagation outside of existing laws?
If so, I partially agree, but also think this is a real fucking easy place to draw the line at, as I am not a free speech absolutist and agree with there being limits.
The reason there is a games industry voluntary ratings organisation is because the games industry as a whole didn't want those ratings being imposed on them by an external organisation or - worse - by actual legislation.
This shit isn't getting rated by the ESRB. I think a reasonable place to draw the line is between 'rated' and 'unrated' content with regards to commercial availability.
YMMV, but I'm not holding it against Valve that they're making an easy concession here.
People like ana Valens can absolutely go fuck themselves though, because while they'll be writing an op-ed about how their latest rape dungeon content is good actually because alphabet gang somehow, they'll also be the absolute fucking first person screaming that steam perpetuates fascism because some edgelord releases MAGA LIFE or whatever.

Is it the slippery slope argument, that although this particular brand of gooner bait is too spicy for your tastes, there is some inevitability that something milder and more in line with your own preferences migth be on the chopping board next?
If so, I disgree with that - I think its more likely an easy compromise here eases activist pressure in the future, not less likely; "What do you mean we don't care about inappropriate content? We already banned this thing you asked for" versus "Oh, you want more? Okay then!".
I will absolutely revisit that stance if they cave in future, because I don't think they will. Note that I also absolutely believe the people who claimed credit for this (if in fact their actions made any difference, which we honestly don't know) will continue to push for more. I just don't think they'll get it.

e: eh, I'll move this to the more in depth conversations thread or whatever because

[Eric Cartman]

Its kinda rare to have nuanced issues worth debating in the shitbin thread, because eras standard operating procedure is "take a reasonable position then crank it 20 points higher into full retard" and then laughing at them

[Disco55]

I don't even disagree that there should be some protection for young kids against the internet, but requiring prove by Ids should not be it Like it is on the UK Online Safety Act and Texas's BS. It is just yet another erosion of the limited privacy we have left. I just also hate that you can't bring up issues with these laws without some dumbass calling the critic a Pedo. It's basically the right's verison of the word Nazi or phobe.

For now VPNs are safe, but you know some lawmaker will try to make them illegal.

[Eric Cartman]

I don't even disagree that there should be some protection for young kids against the internet, but requiring prove by Ids should not be it Like it is on the UK Online Safety Act and Texas's BS. It is just yet another erosion of the limited privacy we have left. I just also hate that you can't bring up issues with these laws without some dumbass calling someone a Pedo. It's basically the right's verison of the word Nazi.

For now VPNs are safe, but you know some lawmaker will try to make them illegal.

I'm actually kind of surprised they passed the Uk online safety act, because politicians have been trying to pass a "think of the internet children!" bill for something like 30 years now, because its a crowd pleaser, but they've historically always been quietly shut down when the security services have had a little chat with the MP in question and explained to them all it does is make catching the real wrong 'uns harder if they feel they're under scrutiny as they cover their tracks better than thinking the internet is basically an unmonitored wild west.

[davepoobond]

Let's see, everyone in here knows full well what the in story context for the nickname is, but they acknowledge the double meaning without anyone being confused.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dankruto/comments/hvm8i4/unapologetically_pervy/

Acknowledgement of how wild the nickname sounds out of context (13 years ago).

https://www.reddit.com/r/Naruto/comments/12408w/hope_you_all_took_this_out_of_context_like_i_did/

Urban Dictionary

Urban Dictionary: Sucker
Sucker: That dude believes [everything] he hears and says but has no clue about what is [actually] [happening].
sucker.urbanup.com sucker.urbanup.com

A person that has been tricked into something.
A gullible person.

Also Urban Dictionary acknowledging the sexual connotation on the same page.

Urban Dictionary: Sucker
Sucker: That dude believes [everything] he hears and says but has no clue about what is [actually] [happening].
sucker.urbanup.com sucker.urbanup.com

A person who loves to suck on a penis because that's whats up. (13 year old post, didn't even make it about gender)


But I'm a trolling liar that makes shit up and I need to admit that I'm wrong.

OP made a retarded post, comes back after the weekend to continue bitching about it. Still developing  

https://www.resetera.com/threads/as-much-flak-as-people-give-english-dubs-they-really-didnt-have-to-be-so-literal-with-some-translations-tsunades-nickname-in-naruto.1248261/page-5#post-142908980

He is such a blowjob

[Eric Cartman]

Hope this guy gets the help he needs.

Hope everyone involved in the creation and proliferation of LLMs gets the jail time they deserve.

Cool forum

[benji]

Games journalism is so fucked in this Trump 2.0 era. Absolutely no company is going to give a shit about real reporting, just sloppification and capitulation to the interests of the uber-rich. I'm glad I got out of the field.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/waypoint-probably-dead-again-as-vice-caves-to-ultraconservative-anti-porn-group-collective-shout.1248486/#post-142896408

Why would the uber-rich have any interests in gaming journalism's content? Why would the uber-rich want porn games shut down or writing about porn games shut down? This is the problem with assuming everyone you don't like are organized in a giant conspiracy against you. It makes you sound stupid.

Why does he think anyone could dictate to him what he published on his own blog for free? This surely can't be why he "got out of the field" since the real reason is that he got a real job.

And yet I bet the Gamergate/Sweet Baby Inc haters who ridicule censorship stays silent on this.

The usual chuds have been up in arms about the games being delisted from Steam, but yes, they are 100% silent so far on Ana and crew.

I would imagine their complaint about censorship doesn't extend to people who were on thin ice for publishing defamatory articles as part of a demand for greater censorship.

that was something that gets lost here. this is the foundation myth of the modern gop. if you were a republican supporting heinous shit, it wasn't enough to just disagree with democrats. you had to have the moral high ground. well what's a higher ground than wanting to expose a cabal of pedophiles who murder and use children for their adrenochromes or whatever. they deluded themselves into believing this is reality - and i don't know if it's because they are aware they hold shit regressive opinions and had to latch onto even the flimsiest of fabricated realities to keep moral superiority, or if they're unaware they hold shit regressive opinions and latched onto the flimsiest of fabricated realities because it actually makes sense in their worldview. but this is it. this is the thing they've been wanting for over a decade. it's part of what gets us pizzagate, info wars, gamergate, and maga.

The problem with this theory formerly sane member? The timeline is completely wrong. Info Wars started in 1999. Gamergate was in 2014. MAGA was 2015. The adrenochrome/pedophile stuff started with QAnon which wasn't until 2017.

The real founding myth was Obama's birth certificate.

but the more events like this happen, the more people will notice and eventually say wait why do they get to tell everyone what to do

Because you can't create a law that says payment processors have to approve all legal purchases, that will just kick it to the banks who you definitely can't write a law for. And passing that first law will be a major issue when people find out that means people will be able to buy guns and chemicals and other terrorist weapons. States already put pressure on payment processors to curtail online purchases so they'll definitely be warning about all the crimes that will happen. Era's obsessed with porn so they focus on the porn but the porn is just the trickle down from everything else. Once a list starts being made someone will inevitably say "well, we shouldn't pay for porn either."

The surprising thing isn't that payment processors are doing this, credit cards used to be far more restricted, it's that it took this long for it to effect "normal" people.

Like seriously, there is no fucking value including the opinions of those who believe Jews, black people, and other minorities should be exterminated in a discussion about equality for all. But, because the US doesn't actually have an apparatus for deplatforming, we have to keep hearing from people like that. It's legitimately infuriating how complicit multiple institutions are in elevating the worst people in this country, under this guise of fairness and tolerance.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/jubilee-1-progressive-vs-far-right-conservatives-feat-mehdi-hasan.1248435/page-4#post-142908746

This is a guy who thinks the US is a giant white supremacist conspiracy of people who want to exterminate all minorities and yet he wants those people to control what's allowed to be said? This is the easiest way to know these people are not smart. They openly lament that their imagined enemies don't have more power to oppress them.

Moral issues around credit card companies imposing censorship aside, I think we can all agree that every single person who makes and buys these games should be put against the wall, right?

Yes, but not for their pornographic/sexual content. Instead they should be because if you've ever clicked on one of these Steam pages you know it's all the same garbage minorly tweaked and resold again with the same hilariously bad 3D models and environments and everything else. And probably over half it is written in Engrish.

I would actually have no problem if Valve took a greater hand against such asset flip crap flooding the store, if they want to blame payment processors for it, that's fine too. There are days where the new releases are flooded with tons of these and other "visual novels" that are the same shit but not as pornographic.

I don't even disagree that there should be some protection for young kids against the internet, but requiring prove by Ids should not be it Like it is on the UK Online Safety Act and Texas's BS. It is just yet another erosion of the limited privacy we have left. I just also hate that you can't bring up issues with these laws without some dumbass calling the critic a Pedo. It's basically the right's verison of the word Nazi or phobe.

For now VPNs are safe, but you know some lawmaker will try to make them illegal.

The federal government once considered too good encryption to be munitions trafficking: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Zimmermann#Arms_Export_Control_Act_investigation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Criminal_investigation

Let's also not forget that this number is still technically illegal to publish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AACS_encryption_key_controversy

[Snoopy]

None of this matters. What really matters is Ted The Goof’s all new Disney adventures.

[Daffy Duck]

We're at this point:

Far be it for me to impugn the reputation of this definitely legitmate organisation, but I find it slightly strange they would use the footnote of their press release to encourage people to pirate an upcoming TV show when it comes out

Fucking disgusting what’s going on in Palestine and these cunts claiming they’re under a genoicde.

Despicable.

[Bootsthecat]

Far be it for me to impugn the reputation of this definitely legitmate organisation, but I find it slightly strange they would use the footnote of their press release to encourage people to pirate an upcoming TV show when it comes out

Fucking disgusting what’s going on in Palestine and these cunts claiming they’re under a genoicde.

Despicable.

Isn't the 'pledge' from Joanne, her replying years ago to some retard on Twitter that she sleeps on piles of money or some shit, and that was editorialized into gospel of spending apparently hundreds of millions of dollars to kill trannnnys?

[benji]

Isn't the 'pledge' from Joanne, her replying years ago to some retard on Twitter that she sleeps on piles of money or some shit, and that was editorialized into gospel of spending apparently hundreds of millions of dollars to kill trannnnys?

That was the old one, but she did more recently pledge to spending more of her money funding women's only shelters which is the source of the pledge now. Presumably she used to fund them rather blindly but now she will only give to those that exclude males.

I doubt she's even really committed to giving tens of millions towards this, although maybe she's doing it now out of spite. The most I could find when I looked a few years ago that she's ever publicly donated to any single thing was $1 million. For a billionaire that's not a lot, but I also doubt that Joanne's a true billionaire since almost all of that would be the worth of the Harry Potter IP which she notably has not sold off. They tend to talk about her like she's Musk or Bezos. I absolutely do not believe she could feasibly drop $300 million on a whim like Musk just did for the last election.

To compare her to another author who wisely handled his IP, George Lucas is probably a lot wealthier.

[BIONIC]

Let's see, everyone in here knows full well what the in story context for the nickname is, but they acknowledge the double meaning without anyone being confused.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dankruto/comments/hvm8i4/unapologetically_pervy/

Acknowledgement of how wild the nickname sounds out of context (13 years ago).

https://www.reddit.com/r/Naruto/comments/12408w/hope_you_all_took_this_out_of_context_like_i_did/

Urban Dictionary

Urban Dictionary: Sucker
Sucker: That dude believes [everything] he hears and says but has no clue about what is [actually] [happening].
sucker.urbanup.com sucker.urbanup.com

A person that has been tricked into something.
A gullible person.

Also Urban Dictionary acknowledging the sexual connotation on the same page.

Urban Dictionary: Sucker
Sucker: That dude believes [everything] he hears and says but has no clue about what is [actually] [happening].
sucker.urbanup.com sucker.urbanup.com

A person who loves to suck on a penis because that's whats up. (13 year old post, didn't even make it about gender)


But I'm a trolling liar that makes shit up and I need to admit that I'm wrong.

OP made a retarded post, comes back after the weekend to continue bitching about it. Still developing  

https://www.resetera.com/threads/as-much-flak-as-people-give-english-dubs-they-really-didnt-have-to-be-so-literal-with-some-translations-tsunades-nickname-in-naruto.1248261/page-5#post-142908980

He’s all over constructive defending his honor

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

I get that most of us don't know each other, and we're reading each other through text and maybe aren't going to always pick up what someone is saying the way they're saying it, misunderstandings happen that way, but I don't care for the way it gets a pass when the misreadings feel a bit more deliberate.

I don't like when I say something, and then people then feel the need to tell me what I'm actually saying and then argue against that adjacent or entirely new point.

I say X, they tell you you said Y and then call you an asshole for saying Y. And it feels like I'm taking crazy pills because the post where you said X is blatantly visible and just being ignored. And you can quote yourself saying X to those people and some just disappear from the conversation. And then I'm sitting there like, why did this person I never interacted with before say I said all these things. Which then ties into the whole Discord of it all in which some names are clearly on a list.

Or sometimes it can be a misunderstanding that you can clarify, but then people just double down so aggressively and it never gets through.

But then you have the people who know exactly what they're doing. I'm now gonna call you angry or a troll or insinuate a grudge against something I like. And you can point out that none of that's true, but they can just choose to ignore all that and continue their gotcha.

That's beyond arguing in bad faith, but there has to be a phrase for it.

And this also stems into why I don't take people's words for things. Someone describes something or someone one way, I look it up for myself instead of parroting what they said, and I see they're sometimes off base. Contextualizing my posts for the Skill Up discussion.

I feel like there's this category of "Era tactics" of how to win an argument we don't really acknowledge. But the thing is, I'm not trying to win anything, but will get dogpiled twice by people who think I am. The point was made, agree with it, or don't. I can follow up on some things but once it gets dragged to such a nasty place where we're just insulting people, it's like, what's the point.

Can't keep up with everything flung at me, just saying my peace.

It's like I don't get to be who I am, Era tells me who and what I am. Criticize A, you're an A hater. Praise B, you're now a B lover which means you hate all the other letter as well. But then when you ask "when did I hate all the other letters, A included?" that gets ignored and people double down on the B thing. And it's not like it's subtle. People do this openly to each other.

So either you're trolling or you're a sexist sick person who thinks that calling a person "sucker" especially at a woman at that - is a whore/oral sexual person.

This is in response to me critiquing localization dialogue. We went from "those writers could've phrased that differently" to that. And then I get blamed for the escalation.

I get when it's 1 vs 100, it's easier to go well obviously you're the problem, but if given the opportunity to break it down post by post, I guarantee my side of it holds up. But then why would anyone want to take the time for that, understandably.

I can literally quote myself trying to come to an understanding with you despite you repeatedly calling me a troll. And then all it takes is for me to lose it once and then it's like "we got em boys", at least that part we can call baiting.

But isn't the general rule, don't be assholes.

If it's any consolation I agree that there's been some bullshit mudslinging aimed at you Derbel. I disagree with your thread premise, but only in a friendly banter way. I'd say try to not let it bother you, but people seem to go at you quite frequently like this, so I can only imagine how frustrating it can be.

Edit - oh I thought i was responding to a post in that very thread, got my notifications mixed up.

you went straight to calling people obtuse because they don’t agree with your premise

Sorry, you went immediately on the defensive, come across aggressive even if you don't mean to and within 3 posts, everyone else was obtuse. I can't get on board with this.

except i specifically went out my way to track down the episode and scene in japanese and had my partner translate/explain if "duck" has alternate meanings in japanese and it turns out, it means someone gullible, someone who can be taken advantage of, a sucker. i added it to the thread and there was quite a few posts in there trying to having a conversation about the translation but the OP never interacted with any of it except having a fit.

My first thought reading this, oh maybe I was rude initially in a way that I missed. Then I read it for myself, a bunch of people assume I don't know what a word means, I clarify for them. They do it again, I clarify again that this isn't necessary. And my response to it still going was ...

"I feel like we're being obtuse here". You see how that's not like the way you described it. You make it sound like I insulted everyone right out of the gate.

It's all in the framing isn't it.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.


Sorry, I didn't respond to the 20+ notifications I got at once. It was sort of a lot.

it's exactly how i described it. i don't agree it's a purposeful double entendres and i'm not being obtuse about it. it’s rude.

i won't be responding about this here any more, this thread has bigger issues

Appreciated. If a thread disagrees with me it's fine, but it's like I distinguish between people disagreeing and then people straight up insulting me for thinking my way.

My problem is when it's clearly the latter and people try to frame it as the former.

"Wow look at this idiot that doesn't understand this kid's series."
"Oh he's mad that we disagree with him."
"No, it's the insults. Its always the insults."

And that's just referring back to a Ratchet and Clank thread I made about a cover system.


That is literally not true. I even explained what the disconnect was. The thread is right there for everyone to see so why lie?

But no need to drag it out. I made my point. My posts stand for themselves. I'm just saying read the whole thing to see how we got there, don't just cherrypick.

I tend to try and read people extremely generously, but when I read that thread, it really comes across as someone posting a thread and getting needlessly aggressive when people disagree.

Also, as a woman, I do not in any way agree with your premise and have never heard the term "sucker" used in a sexual context unless its preceded by a naughty word.

Seems like you quite often attribute people interpreting things differently to you as being deliberately untruthful.

Someone said you insulted people by calling them "obtuse", you respond saying you didn't do that and quote yourself, they say the quote you provided is insulting, you call them a liar.

I don't track your posts, but I feel like I've read at least one or two other lengthy posts ITT from you more or less on this topic and I'm not sure what you're hoping to achieve with them. It's likely true you do get unfairly dogpiled at times, but it's also likely true you are sometimes comporting yourself in a way that others are finding abrasive, then when that's called out you respond poorly and claim they are misrepresnting you by telling you how you're making them feeli.

That you didn't intend to insult someone doesn't mean that you didn't, and doesn't make someone saying you insulted them a liar. You put a lot of this down to malice, that people are deliberately misrepresnting you and it seems paranoid to me.

In general, as someone above said, if you find posts where you think someone has crossed a line or broken a rule report them.

Have you ever thought that these things (where "the people double down on you in bad faith") happen to you so much it might not be because of "the people"?

Explain to me how

"I feel like we're being obtuse here". is an insult.

Explain to me how

"I feel like we're being obtuse here".

said in response to multiple people telling you what a word means even though you clarified multiple times you know what the word means and are now ignoring you to repeat the same thing.

That's what happened.

Their description is that I just came out insulting people for disagreeing with me.

You see how that paints two different pictures right? Ones a passive response. The other is just aggressive and petty.

So when I quote what happened more specifically and you still stick with that second painting, yeah, it kind of feels like lying.



If I say blue and 100 people tell me I said red, if I remember blue and can clearly see my post that says blue, and am literally going "hey look at where I said blue" and people still claim I said red, I'm betting on myself.



Your experience is your experience, but the responses made it seem like I just misunderstood a word and made up a definition. If I can cite comment sections or threads in other places making the same observation or just the joke "woah, that sounds wild out of context", does that not prove my point, which is just an acknowledgement of awkward phrasing. That's all.

I even cited another cartoon that regularly uses the word "sucker", and noted the difference.

The framing of the scene itself and the word legendary just gave it a different connotation to me. That's all.

A handful of people in the thread even acknowledged this, so I'm wondering why I'm being told that I'm making shit up. And how I NEED to admit that I'm wrong or I'm trolling, to what purpose.

No one considered it just to just be slang they're not aware, it just went straight to me making shit up.

Since looking into it, I can now cite those Reddit threads and YouTube comment sections and sucker by itself even has that definition mentioned buried in urban dictionary. But I'm the lying troll that needs to admit that he's wrong (you didn't say this, I'm quoting the thread).

And saying any of this doesn't matter because it'll get ignored and someone will just repeat something someone else already said that I disproved.

Zero introspection.

Calling people "obtuse", generally meaning stupid or slow, a few posts into your thread could very well be considered insulting. Saying "we're being obtuse" doesn't do much to offset that.

So people saying you insulted people, or that they felt insulted, aren't lying. Your insistence that they are speaks to why you seem to keep coming up against these issues.

I would seriously consider why you keep finding similar situations like this, and what your part in it might be.

Sigh ...

"I feel like we're being obtuse here".

Being obtuse.

Choosing to misunderstand what I'm saying.

But yes, ZERO introspection. I can't tell you why you just put me in that situation.

So you say "obtuse" and mean "deliberatly not understanding", while others are reading it to mean "stupid" or "slow" both of which are understood definitions of the word.

But you call the people who say they found it insulting liars. Not that it could be a different interpretaton of something.

"Sorry, I didn't mean to insult anyone, I meant X"
or
"These people saying I insulted them are lying and deliberately misrepresenting me"

Seriously, worth taking a minute to consider why you feel this keeps happening to you.

Sources cited and shared and watch it change nothing because my words don't matter, only what you say I said and we gotta keep the joke going, right?

But they're not choosing to "misunderstand". They understand exactly what you're saying but fundamentally disagree with the statement. Implying they're choosing to misrepresent you is insulting.

Like you're quoting urban dictionary now to prove your point, and its not even the top definition.

Because there are MULTIPLE DEFINITIONS!!!

They chose to ignore my post saying I know what the word means by telling me the definition over and over. That's not disagreeing, that's ignoring.

Just because there are multiple doesn't mean they're all used regularly, and Urban Dictionary doesn't show where the definitions origin is, also anyone can add any definition to a word/phrase they want to there, there's very little regulation outside of voting thumbs up or thumbs down on what means what. Everything on sucker has 0 votes either way because it's universally known as someone who is gullible(A sucker born every minute), and less so as someone who has a weakness for something(I'm a sucker for word etymology). As for the definition you're using as the basis for the thread, yeah I can see how that could be a term used for that, but I've literally never heard it used in that way that in my nearly 40 years here.

A more reputable source than Urban Dictionary, Miriam Webster does not list anything related to your thread premise for sucker as a definition, maybe suckling if you're looking at it generously, but even then it's not a common use. I can't even quickly find examples of it on the internet being used in that way.

[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sucker[/URL]

You're latching on to a definition you found on Urban Dictionary, or that in your circle of friends/area you live in it is used as a phrase but it ultimately isn't common outside of that.

The initial implication was that I made up the connotation. Urban Dictionary is the OTHER source (we're not acknowledging the reddit thread for some reason). And I'm using it to back what I already know, I'm not getting the definition from them.

Who goes to Miriam Webster for slang? Honestly. Maybe don't try to be an expert on this one. Hey, Mariam Webster, what does "throat GOAT" mean? Weird, I'm not getting any suitable results from the "more reputable source", it's like I should use a site specifically made for slang on this subject.

So apparently, it's just me and my friends in New York, then my Florida friends in one city, and then my Florida friends in another city, a handful of Era members and then randoms online from over a decade ago who are all in on this. Just this select few of us.

It seems like you misunderstood a word because you have, because sucker is not used as a euphemism for blow jobs. At least not widely in the United States.

You seem hostile because you continue to aggressively defend this position at anyone who disagrees or says you are wrong, to the point of saying you've disproved their stance or claiming people are lying or being obtuse. And you frame your defense in a patronizing way as you are the smartest person in the thread.

You don't need to admit you are wrong. I think you need to take a breath and remember that not everyone has it out for you even if they disagree with you.

You don't need to cite comment sections elsewhere because you feel like the work sucker in this context is sexual. Sometimes its best to just have the thread closed or stop posting.

Edit: Telling people who disagree with you "Maybe don't try to be an expert on this one" is EXTREMELY insulting and patronizing.

User warned: cross-thread drama

I am what you say I am, since I clearly don't get a say. Silly of me to point it out and expect people to stop doing it because obviously it's working.

People tell me I made up a definition, sure, I have absolutely no reason to cite it being used in different places.

I think I'm the smartest person here, I don't know what that's based on, sure, let's say I think that.

I'm not feeling kind to be insulting me, sure, I'm hostile.

I did not in fact state the difference between people disagreeing with me and those insulting me, I'm aggressive towards everyone. You did not literally quote me directly talking to someone who disagreed with me respectfully.

People are not doing the exact things I described in my initial post.

I'm begging you not to have some introspection because I find your threads very entertaining as a result

[Snoopy]

Ted The Terrible Swimmer writes -

As someone who barely survived drowning as a kid, it's not something I would ever wish on anyone else.

RIP, Malcolm. A real fucking shame.

ME ME ME ME ME ME


https://www.resetera.com/threads/malcolm-jamal-warner-cosby-show-alum-dead-at-54.1248981/#post-142918182

[HaughtyFrank]

Far be it for me to impugn the reputation of this definitely legitmate organisation, but I find it slightly strange they would use the footnote of their press release to encourage people to pirate an upcoming TV show when it comes out

Fucking disgusting what’s going on in Palestine and these cunts claiming they’re under a genoicde.

Despicable.

Isn't the 'pledge' from Joanne, her replying years ago to some retard on Twitter that she sleeps on piles of money or some shit, and that was editorialized into gospel of spending apparently hundreds of millions of dollars to kill trannnnys?

Yes. As far as I know the only confirmed donation she ever made regarding trans was 70k to support a lawsuit a year or so ago.

[Kyon1988]

Ted The Terrible Swimmer writes -

As someone who barely survived drowning as a kid, it's not something I would ever wish on anyone else.

RIP, Malcolm. A real fucking shame.

ME ME ME ME ME ME


https://www.resetera.com/threads/malcolm-jamal-warner-cosby-show-alum-dead-at-54.1248981/#post-142918182

He really knows to make everything about himself

[benji]

The initial implication was that I made up the connotation. Urban Dictionary is the OTHER source (we're not acknowledging the reddit thread for some reason). And I'm using it to back what I already know, I'm not getting the definition from them.

Who goes to Miriam Webster for slang? Honestly. Maybe don't try to be an expert on this one. Hey, Mariam Webster, what does "throat GOAT" mean? Weird, I'm not getting any suitable results from the "more reputable source", it's like I should use a site specifically made for slang on this subject.

So apparently, it's just me and my friends in New York, then my Florida friends in one city, and then my Florida friends in another city, a handful of Era members and then randoms online from over a decade ago who are all in on this. Just this select few of us.

He accurately described "just this select few of us" and then is acting like he didn't. More evidence he doesn't grasp how definitions work.

Also, throat goat is on Wiktionary and provides the reason it doesn't need to be in Miriam Webster (GOAT in this usage was famously added to Webster recently):

Etymology
From throat (“to take into the throat”) +‎ GOAT (“greatest of all time”).

This doesn't exist for his usage of sucker, indeed he's trying to do the etymology backwards as can be seen on cocksucker:

Etymology
From cock +‎ sucker.

If sucker had this definition by itself, cocksucker would unnecessary.

Wiktionary exists as a middle ground between Webster and Urban Dictionary, where anyone could post anything, and it has no usage of sucker like he's claiming: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sucker

We can further show how he's doing things backwards, he's not taking any source and working from it as the predominant definitions, instead he's searching for any examples he can find that backs up his definition. People can reject this, like the reddit thread he keeps complaining people are ignoring, because this isn't how evidence works. Outliers are properly dismissed because you don't need to account for them. Since this is how argumentation on Era usually proceeds it's nice to see that at least some people there can recognize that it's wrong even if they don't about more relevant topics.

except i specifically went out my way to track down the episode and scene in japanese and had my partner translate/explain if "duck" has alternate meanings in japanese and it turns out, it means someone gullible, someone who can be taken advantage of, a sucker. i added it to the thread and there was quite a few posts in there trying to having a conversation about the translation but the OP never interacted with any of it except having a fit.

Watch out, he can cite duck too:

(US, LGBTQ, prison slang) Synonym of bitch (“a man forced or coerced into a homosexual relationship, especially in prison”).
1986 April 19, Michael Rathbone, “Tell Someone”, in Gay Community News, page 4:
The more passive males are subjected to physical violence. I was subjected to being what they call a punk or a duck, which is someone else's power trip, that's all.

[benji]

Ted The Terrible Swimmer writes -

As someone who barely survived drowning as a kid, it's not something I would ever wish on anyone else.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/malcolm-jamal-warner-cosby-show-alum-dead-at-54.1248981/#post-142918182

It's okay, he didn't survive drowning.