deleted by creator

You can want to be as specific all you want. Doesn’t mean the person you initially replied to is wrong, especially given there’s a couple of American dictionaries who list that definition. And I’d temper your rhetoric about there being such a divide a bit too, especially when Ohio and Indiana voted for Trump the year he won. Sure seems like there were a bunch of northerners who were thinking along the same lines as those in the south…

Also, no need to apologise for being a prick, you shouldn’t give two fucks about what people think of you here. I mean, why should you censor yourself for some randoms who don’t know you from a bar of soap? We all have opinions, we should be able to express them how we want. We should also expect criticisms of those opinions though.

To be fair, they didn’t actually say that what the others called it was smart or correct, just that they did call it that. But given nuance can be deduced from people’s words, I think we can both assume that the person you’re engaging with isn’t playing with a full deck of cards…

Honestly, it’s worse, if you’re thinking of the Chappelle’s Show skit. At least the character Clayton Bigsby is also blind so he literally doesn’t know he’s actually white.

How can that be a classic behaviour? For one, they haven’t done it, as illustrated by how hard they’ve cracked down on any facist behaviour since the cessation of WII. And wouldn’t they have had to have done it more than once for it to be a classic behaviour? They’ve literally been nazists once. They’d have to have been nazists more than once, and gone through the phases you’ve described for any normal person to call it a “classic”.

You know what is an example of a classic behaviour though? Internet “experts” who just trust what they’re given and don’t do any research about it. Like you’ve done. Want proof? Read the other reply to the comment you’ve replied to here. And if that’s not enough, explain to me why the German foreign minister hasn’t been jailed/charged/etc for these remarks. Never trust just one source.

Nah, it’s easy to imagine that. Multiplayer. The Nazi team wins. Swastikas everywhere. Pretty sure it’s why cod no longer has swastikas in multiplayer anymore (and if I’m remembering rightly, they kept it in the single player as they felt it wasn’t offensive as it is given with a hell of a lot of context that multiplayer rounds simply don’t have).

Actually, she did have HIV in the movie, the screenwriter confirmed it a few years ago. She did have hep-c in the book though.

Which is totally fine. Your usage of them as you did would be called a scare quote.

You sure as shit don’t. They used the quotation marks just fine. So fine in fact, that this usage you are so against is a well established grammatical device, look up “scare quotes”.

If you’re American, they’re not yanks as they aren’t Yankees. But to the rest of us, everyone who is a citizen of the US is a yank, regardless of if they’re a Yankee or not. Fair point on the rest though.

They don’t. Go and reread what I wrote, then come back here and quote the part of my comment where I said that.

And I again refer you back to what I previously wrote, your priorities change as you age. Mine did. I’m far more likely to have sex with a partner who’s company I enjoy than someone who’s company I don’t enjoy. That aside, I didn’t say you’re gonna just start solely having sex with only people you have good company with. I didn’t even say that you’d stop trying to have sex with people you were physically attracted to. I said your standards will change. Which insinuated that maybe you might not have slept with someone when you were 18yo cos they didn’t meet your criteria of being attractive back then, but you might now cos your standards have changed.

Bandcamp, qobuz, bleep, Beatport, theres a number of options out there to pick up cheap digital music. And then you also have the aforementioned eBay and discogs etc. Which, true, is second hand. But even splitting the amount the artist makes from that physical release between you and the person who previously bought it, they are still making way more from you than they would from just your streams.

And sure, 216 albums doesn’t seem like much. But they’d be all yours. Nobody could take them from you (well, besides if you got physically robbed I guess). There’s a bunch of stuff that has disappeared off of there. Big Black, Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, Joanna Newsom, off the top of my head. You also have artists that have never been on there, Tatsuro Yamashita comes to mind. It also used to be a real problem with artists like Tool, The Beatles, AC/DC just not being there at all too. Then there’s other times where I’ve been playing albums, and tracks are just straight up missing (I presume due to licensing issues). I remember being royally annoyed with A Cross The Universe missing a bunch of tracks ages ago, and it used to happen frequently enough with other releases that it made an impression. Plus all the classic hip-hop that is missing cos of sample clearance issues. And heaven forbid if you wanna listen to classical music, or traditional music from around the world, it’s as if Spotify has never heard of the genre (both genres are represented, but it’s such a poor showing that they would’ve done better if there was just none at all). And I understand that this isn’t all on Spotify, but I’ve never had any of those issues with my personal collection.

Is it perfect? No. Does it reward the artist fairly? Undoubtedly. Would I take it over Spotify? Every day of the year for the rest of my life.

To be pedantic, there was DRM on music purchased on iTunes prior to 2009. Was a bit of a ballache converting that back in the day. Could’ve been worse though, I do like to buy most of my music physically so I didn’t have to convert too much of my collection (still a ballache though cos it was still way more files than I wanted to convert).

Wait, what? That seems odd. They’ve deleted music videos from my account (which I had the files for, and the videos in question were also pulled from YouTube etc by the band, so I don’t think it’s apple’s fault they were pulled), but I still have all the music I’ve made myself. I do back it up every 2 or 3 months (I would cry for the rest of my life if I lost it, I have nearly 2yrs of continuous music), but I’ve never had to restore it (and this has reinforced why I do back up).

Edit: looked it up, I see the issue now. I don’t use Apple music, and every instance I can find of this happening is associated with ceasing that subscription. But I just use iTunes and the iTunes store. Dunno how this would work for you since it’s your own music (and I dunno if it’d work for music not in the iTunes catalogue, ie stuff from Bandcamp, qobuz, cough cough less than legal methods, etc), but it would appear all you have to do is log in to your account again and re-download the deleted files.

Second edit: just realised I have lost some actual music from my account. The series of live albums that iTunes directly released from the iTunes festivals they ran like 15yrs ago just came to mind. They’re gone from my account. And probably a bunch of others. They were never deleted from my hard drive though.

You’re still gonna be attracted to 20yos physically. There’s over 100k years of evolution that wants you to mate with the fittest, most attractive mate that you can. But is that a person you actually want to spend time with outside of the bedroom? So, yeah, your standards in regards to physical attractiveness are gonna drop as you age, but your other standards will likely change too.

deleted by creator

You don’t understand basic English comprehension.

Let’s break down your initial comment.

But if he was shooting pub goers

He wasn’t so the rest of your comment is irrelevant. He had shot pub goers, but he wasn’t when he was killed. He had been subdued. Don’t need to break down the rest cos it’s as useful as you are in general to society, not very.

The article says “after the shooting” the gunman was killed.

Pretty fucking clear to me. Note it doesn’t say “during” or any of its synonyms.

Okay, here’s some reading comprehension for you. The person you intially replied to made it clear that the death of the gunman happened after the gunman was subdued. They also said that appropriate force would be reasonable if he was actively shooting. You’ve basically repeated what they’ve said, trying to antagonise a response. It’s a shitty way to try and have a discussion, and I’m gonna call people out on this every day of the week. Be better.

deleted by creator