The many questions-not-worth-their-own-thread question thread XVII

[cardgame]

Yes, I wouldn't expect a forum devoted to farmville to have the same level of discussion.

Question:

What is better, mind-blowing amazing sex with a woman you find attractive, but you can only get it on occasion not knowing when it will be your last. Or average, routine sex with an unattractive woman, but you have security, stability, and a steady supply of sex. Which would you rather have in your life? Stability, but boring sex, or mind-blowing amazing sex with an unstable woman?

I've been debating this question for a while, and trying to decide what is better for my life, but I've come to no conclusion.

Unstable woman, votes I.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Here's a question: For Archives v.2, I've been going through all my newspapers and changing them so they also have the town/city name in it.

Spoiler if you don't get it :

E.g. I had a bunch of papers that were called "The Record-Journal." They came from some town called Meriden (I don't know where that is) so I renamed it "Meriden Record-Journal."

Is this an accepted procedure?

 

[Cutlass]

It's in Connecticut You could either do that or you could say "the Record-Journal of Meriden Connecticut".

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Well really long names tend to muck up the tables (if anyone seen the site before it went defunct, they'd know what I mean by the tables).

 

[Skwink]

Yes, I wouldn't expect a forum devoted to farmville to have the same level of discussion.

Question:

What is better, mind-blowing amazing sex with a woman you find attractive, but you can only get it on occasion not knowing when it will be your last. Or average, routine sex with an unattractive woman, but you have security, stability, and a steady supply of sex. Which would you rather have in your life? Stability, but boring sex, or mind-blowing amazing sex with an unstable woman?

I've been debating this question for a while, and trying to decide what is better for my life, but I've come to no conclusion.

Which do you love?

 

[Cutlass]

Well really long names tend to muck up the tables (if anyone seen the site before it went defunct, they'd know what I mean by the tables).

Add a column. Publication name: Publication location.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Add a column. Publication name: Publication location.

Too many columns as is.

Though I'm half-considering making an index of publications. Perhaps sorted by location.

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

You know how a person slowly goes from one major interest to the next over long periods of time, instead of just staying with a single major interest their whole life? Is that a normal part of a person, that's been with us since the dawn of humanity, or is it a side effect of our modern times and/or our consumerist culture?

Spoiler :

Huge font size intended. I don't want to be drowned out by a certain poster.

 

[Skwink]

You know how a person slowly goes from one major interest to the next over long periods of time, instead of just staying with a single major interest their whole life? Is that a normal part of a person, that's been with us since the dawn of humanity, or is it a side effect of our modern times and/or our consumerist culture?

Spoiler :

Huge font size intended. I don't want to be drowned out by a certain poster.

Interested in Green girls now?

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

Interested in Green girls now?

I despise the color green.

So, no.

I'm just curious as to whether repeatedly switching interests was normal, as I fear it might happen to me yet again.

 

[madviking]

No need to get all conspiratorial here, bro. People change and so do their interest.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Don't listen to madviking's lies! A normal human being-develops his one, solitary interest in life around 5 seconds after birth. Changing your interest overtime is some sort of fluke, you might want to go see your doctor about it.

 

[GenMarshall]

What is "partisan revisionism"?

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

What is "partisan revisionism"?

It means interpretating something to make it political. I can't think of any examples off-hand, sorry.

Here's dictionary:
partisan: prejudiced in favor of a particular cause.
revisionism: a departure from any authoritative or generally accepted doctrine, theory, practice, etc.

I dont know the context you saw it in, but I'd say its usually not a good thing

 

[madviking]

What is "partisan revisionism"?

"WHAT DO WE LIKE?"
"SCOTLAND!"
"HOW DO WE LIKE IT?"
"IN OUR HISTORY BOOKS"
"WHO DO WE NOT WANT IN OUR HISTORY BOOKS?"
"THOSE DAMN ENGLISH!"

Sorry I'm talking about Braveheart with a friend right now.

 

[NickyJ]

"WHAT DO WE LIKE?"
"SCOTLAND!"
"HOW DO WE LIKE IT?"
"IN OUR HISTORY BOOKS"
"WHO DO WE NOT WANT IN OUR HISTORY BOOKS?"
"THOSE DAMN ENGLISH!"

Sorry I'm talking about Braveheart with a friend right now.

I think I have your current favorite emoticon:

 

[Arakhor]

Other examples of partisan revisionism would be to insist that Ronald Reagan was a virtual god who could do no wrong or that Margaret Thatcher was the best thing to happen to the UK.

 

[Glassfan]

Other examples of partisan revisionism would be to insist that Ronald Reagan was a virtual god who could do no wrong or that Margaret Thatcher was the best thing to happen to the UK.

Actually, we believed Ronald Reagan was a virtual god at the time, so it's not actually revisionism, per se. Rather, it is revisionism that today you regard him as not.

 

[Cutlass]

Actually, we believed Ronald Reagan was a virtual god at the time, so it's not actually revisionism, per se. Rather, it is revisionism that today you regard him as not.

Reagan's approval rating was mostly in the ordinary range while he was president. We knew what a screwup he was. But he was likable, so that faded with time. His administration was notable for screwups and scandals.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

How did CFC manage to answer a question about what partisan revisionism with a demonstration of it? LOL.