Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

#55561

tina wrote:MN update: Latsot has now repeated on his blog his allegation that I defend rapists, writing â€œThis is what I mean when I say that Michael Nugent defends rapists. Itâ€™s what I always meant. I stand by it. I didnâ€™t apologise for that and I donâ€™t apologise for it now.â€ He has written of his previous Twitter apology: â€œIt was a not-pology: sorry you thought thatâ€™s what I what I said. Sorry if I came across that way. But what I said stands.â€ Here is Latsotâ€™s up-to-date allegation.http://lookatthestateofthat.blogspot.co ... gents.html

interesting comment section

#55562

Tribble wrote:
Nec_V20 wrote:It is not 4 ms but at least 5 ms grey to grey refresh that you are talking about and in a gaming monitor that is an absolute buzz-kill. You can get away with that kind of monitor if you watch videos or stuff like that but not with games.

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that one should cheap out on the most important interface between the the person and the computer?

We are not talking about all that big a difference between the junk you suggest and a decent 2ms monitor.
He's got a $1000 budget. He's going to pay tax and/or shipping. 4ms won't give you, in the games he listed, any ghosting. Therefore, 4ms is fine. Not only that, but 5ms monitors are perfectly fine (except the imaginary fan-boy ghosting) in gaming. It's not until you get to 8ms do you see anything more than imaginary ghosting.

Here is the tech (Tom's Hardware) on it:
5 ms = 200hz
2 ms = 500hz

Essentially those are the refresh rates that would limit the response time in order for you to notice any artifacts. Consequently, if either monitor is hooked up to a rig that is putting out 60hz video, you won't see any difference.

as far as can human eye notice anything faster or slower, yes a human eye can notice things faster than 8 ms, it depends on the conditions in which an eye has to notice things. But as far as your ability to tell between 5ms and 2ms - human brain has no way of distinguishing even if the eye can.
The bottom line is, according to the experts at Tom's Hardware, ghosting (except the imaginary kind) doesn't show up until 8ms on 60hz system. And since most games are locked at 60hz, or lower, it isn't going to happen. So, all you're really doing when you drop under 4ms, or even 5 ms, is just paying too much.

So, thank you for playing, you can pick up your consolation prize at the door.

For 60 Hz to be displayed correctly it would the require a monitor to be capable of a 1.66 ms grey to grey response rate.

Your eyes do not only have RGB receptors but also much more sensitive greyscale receptors which are a lot more sensitive than the the colour ones. Often when playing games the ambient light is reduced so that the main light source is the monitor.

If you are going to cite sources then I will cite the much more prestigious "C't Magazin" from Heise Verlag and they have never marked a monitor better than (-) or minus for gaming with a refresh rate of 5ms (in most cases they are marked down as (--) or double minus) The thing is that C't doesn't give a shit who gets butthurt by their reviews (they go out and anonymously buy what they test) whereas the likes of Tom's Hardware are dependant on companies sending them stuff for free to test. So guess who has the more incentive to fudge and guess who I trust more?

If 5 ms is good enough for you - and I fucking well know it isn't - then bonza mate.

My advice however would be not to cheap out on the primary computer-human interface.

But what the fuck do I know, right?

#55563

Nec_V20 wrote:
Tribble wrote:
Nec_V20 wrote:It is not 4 ms but at least 5 ms grey to grey refresh that you are talking about and in a gaming monitor that is an absolute buzz-kill. You can get away with that kind of monitor if you watch videos or stuff like that but not with games.

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that one should cheap out on the most important interface between the the person and the computer?

We are not talking about all that big a difference between the junk you suggest and a decent 2ms monitor.
He's got a $1000 budget. He's going to pay tax and/or shipping. 4ms won't give you, in the games he listed, any ghosting. Therefore, 4ms is fine. Not only that, but 5ms monitors are perfectly fine (except the imaginary fan-boy ghosting) in gaming. It's not until you get to 8ms do you see anything more than imaginary ghosting.

Here is the tech (Tom's Hardware) on it:
5 ms = 200hz
2 ms = 500hz

Essentially those are the refresh rates that would limit the response time in order for you to notice any artifacts. Consequently, if either monitor is hooked up to a rig that is putting out 60hz video, you won't see any difference.

as far as can human eye notice anything faster or slower, yes a human eye can notice things faster than 8 ms, it depends on the conditions in which an eye has to notice things. But as far as your ability to tell between 5ms and 2ms - human brain has no way of distinguishing even if the eye can.
The bottom line is, according to the experts at Tom's Hardware, ghosting (except the imaginary kind) doesn't show up until 8ms on 60hz system. And since most games are locked at 60hz, or lower, it isn't going to happen. So, all you're really doing when you drop under 4ms, or even 5 ms, is just paying too much.

So, thank you for playing, you can pick up your consolation prize at the door.
For 60 Hz to be displayed correctly it would the require a monitor to be capable of a 1.66 ms grey to grey response rate.

Your eyes do not only have RGB receptors but also much more sensitive greyscale receptors which are a lot more sensitive than the the colour ones. Often when playing games the ambient light is reduced so that the main light source is the monitor.

If you are going to cite sources then I will cite the much more prestigious "C't Magazin" from Heise Verlag and they have never marked a monitor better than (-) or minus for gaming with a refresh rate of 5ms (in most cases they are marked down as (--) or double minus) The thing is that C't doesn't give a shit who gets butthurt by their reviews (they go out and anonymously buy what they test) whereas the likes of Tom's Hardware are dependant on companies sending them stuff for free to test. So guess who has the more incentive to fudge and guess who I trust more?

If 5 ms is good enough for you - and I fucking well know it isn't - then bonza mate.

My advice however would be not to cheap out on the primary computer-human interface.

But what the fuck do I know, right?

Can you explain to me, in words of few syllables, why a 60 Hz refresh rate requires a 1.66 ms response time to display 'correctly'. Also, please define what you mean by 'correctly'.

#55564

NoGodsEver wrote:
Tribble wrote:
Nec_V20 wrote:It is not 4 ms but at least 5 ms grey to grey refresh that you are talking about and in a gaming monitor that is an absolute buzz-kill. You can get away with that kind of monitor if you watch videos or stuff like that but not with games.

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that one should cheap out on the most important interface between the the person and the computer?

We are not talking about all that big a difference between the junk you suggest and a decent 2ms monitor.
He's got a $1000 budget. He's going to pay tax and/or shipping. 4ms won't give you, in the games he listed, any ghosting. Therefore, 4ms is fine. Not only that, but 5ms monitors are perfectly fine (except the imaginary fan-boy ghosting) in gaming. It's not until you get to 8ms do you see anything more than imaginary ghosting.

Here is the tech (Tom's Hardware) on it:
5 ms = 200hz
2 ms = 500hz

Essentially those are the refresh rates that would limit the response time in order for you to notice any artifacts. Consequently, if either monitor is hooked up to a rig that is putting out 60hz video, you won't see any difference.

as far as can human eye notice anything faster or slower, yes a human eye can notice things faster than 8 ms, it depends on the conditions in which an eye has to notice things. But as far as your ability to tell between 5ms and 2ms - human brain has no way of distinguishing even if the eye can.
The bottom line is, according to the experts at Tom's Hardware, ghosting (except the imaginary kind) doesn't show up until 8ms on 60hz system. And since most games are locked at 60hz, or lower, it isn't going to happen. So, all you're really doing when you drop under 4ms, or even 5 ms, is just paying too much.

So, thank you for playing, you can pick up your consolation prize at the door.

Are you really implying that NEC and his boys don't have superhuman vision?

What's being implied is that you barely count as sentient in this discussion.

#55565

So, admittedly I haven't been following the Horde for very long, but has this latsot person been around for a while, and if so, has he always been this much of a useless pain in the ass? He seems to exist simply to start shit with people.

#55566

Nec, why did you join atheism+ at all?

Did you think it was a good idea?

#55567

I'm convinced Nec is an atheism+ troll.

#55568

blitzem wrote:So, admittedly I haven't been following the Horde for very long, but has this latsot person been around for a while, and if so, has he always been this much of a useless pain in the ass? He seems to exist simply to start shit with people.

Don't know of him from before. He is just another SJW clone though. They all say the same thing and with the same complete lack of evidence or self reflection.

#55569

blitzem wrote:So, admittedly I haven't been following the Horde for very long, but has this latsot person been around for a while, and if so, has he always been this much of a useless pain in the ass? He seems to exist simply to start shit with people.

Yeah, Latty's been around for a while - a pretty damn odd Pharynguloon who tends to keep most of his imbecility confined to Twitter. His previous claim to fame was throwing an epic strop at getting temporarily banned from said social interaction site for agressively & pretty much obsessively tweeting at Metaburbia (I think), who got so sick of the little twerp that he reported him.

Cue Latty whinnying on his blog about his freeze peaches being compromised - where even Oolon popped in to commiserate in the comments section. Much irony was involved, not that those two dipshits were aware of it.

Prior to his temp ban, Latty oft tweeted about the acts of violence he'd like to perform on MRAs. Now he's kinda quiet about that - badass to the core, he no doubt dreads another Twitter suspension. Oh, eek!

#55570

You guys seen this yet?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... =FB1013_03

It's pretty interesting. The researcher reveals himself a shitlord when he describes different effects in males and females.

#55571

tina wrote:MN update: Latsot has now repeated on his blog his allegation that I defend rapists, writing â€œThis is what I mean when I say that Michael Nugent defends rapists. Itâ€™s what I always meant. I stand by it. I didnâ€™t apologise for that and I donâ€™t apologise for it now.â€ He has written of his previous Twitter apology: â€œIt was a not-pology: sorry you thought thatâ€™s what I what I said. Sorry if I came across that way. But what I said stands.â€ Here is Latsotâ€™s up-to-date allegation.http://lookatthestateofthat.blogspot.co ... gents.html

Latsot wrote:

Who are these people?

Example: people who have sex with others who are impaired by alcohol. Thatâ€™s rape. Lots of people commenting at your place have argued otherwise and claimed to have had sex with people with impaired judgement. Those people are rapists. In any case, itâ€™s not up to me to tell the police. Itâ€™s not my decision. But I certainly donâ€™t have to tolerate those people or their views in a space I own and police. I consider such tolerance tacit endorsement.

Maybe he would like to point out where in the comments "lots" of people said that.

#55572

dogen wrote:
Nec_V20 wrote:It is not 4 ms but at least 5 ms grey to grey refresh that you are talking about and in a gaming monitor that is an absolute buzz-kill. You can get away with that kind of monitor if you watch videos or stuff like that but not with games.

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that one should cheap out on the most important interface between the the person and the computer?

We are not talking about all that big a difference between the junk you suggest and a decent 2ms monitor.

He's got a $1000 budget. He's going to pay tax and/or shipping. 4ms won't give you, in the games he listed, any ghosting. Therefore, 4ms is fine. Not only that, but 5ms monitors are perfectly fine (except the imaginary fan-boy ghosting) in gaming. It's not until you get to 8ms do you see anything more than imaginary ghosting.

Here is the tech (Tom's Hardware) on it:
5 ms = 200hz
2 ms = 500hz

Essentially those are the refresh rates that would limit the response time in order for you to notice any artifacts. Consequently, if either monitor is hooked up to a rig that is putting out 60hz video, you won't see any difference.

as far as can human eye notice anything faster or slower, yes a human eye can notice things faster than 8 ms, it depends on the conditions in which an eye has to notice things. But as far as your ability to tell between 5ms and 2ms - human brain has no way of distinguishing even if the eye can.
The bottom line is, according to the experts at Tom's Hardware, ghosting (except the imaginary kind) doesn't show up until 8ms on 60hz system. And since most games are locked at 60hz, or lower, it isn't going to happen. So, all you're really doing when you drop under 4ms, or even 5 ms, is just paying too much.

So, thank you for playing, you can pick up your consolation prize at the door.

For 60 Hz to be displayed correctly it would the require a monitor to be capable of a 1.66 ms grey to grey response rate.

Your eyes do not only have RGB receptors but also much more sensitive greyscale receptors which are a lot more sensitive than the the colour ones. Often when playing games the ambient light is reduced so that the main light source is the monitor.

If you are going to cite sources then I will cite the much more prestigious "C't Magazin" from Heise Verlag and they have never marked a monitor better than (-) or minus for gaming with a refresh rate of 5ms (in most cases they are marked down as (--) or double minus) The thing is that C't doesn't give a shit who gets butthurt by their reviews (they go out and anonymously buy what they test) whereas the likes of Tom's Hardware are dependant on companies sending them stuff for free to test. So guess who has the more incentive to fudge and guess who I trust more?

If 5 ms is good enough for you - and I fucking well know it isn't - then bonza mate.

My advice however would be not to cheap out on the primary computer-human interface.

But what the fuck do I know, right?
Can you explain to me, in words of few syllables, why a 60 Hz refresh rate requires a 1.66 ms response time to display 'correctly'. Also, please define what you mean by 'correctly'.

Monitors have what is known as a "rise time" (going from black to white) and a "fall time" (going from white to black) the rise time is a lot slower than the fall time. The thing is that you don't have very much black-white-black strobing but rather from some value of the 0 (black)-255(white) to another value of 0 - 255. The refresh rate is how long the pixel will stay in the state it is in, so no matter what you are looking at any change in the monitor takes 16.66 ms at 60 Hz. Within those 16.66 ms the monitor has to be able to transition from one grey state to another.

5 ms response time only gives the logic hardware of the monitor 11.66 ms to correctly display a new value. 2 ms response time gives the monitor 14.66 ms to correctly display the new value, and not only that but leave it there long enough for your eye to realise it.

There are however a number of milliseconds lost each time a pixel has to change state as I stated above.

That is honestly as simply as I can put it.

#55573

Parody Accountant wrote:Nec, why did you join atheism+ at all?

Did you think it was a good idea?

I wanted to find out for myself and not be reliant on the views of others.

#55574

Parody Accountant wrote:I'm convinced Nec is an atheism+ troll.

You think that every cunt is a troll so hey, stop the presses "PA thinks Nec is a troll"

I have noticed that you have a limited vocabulary so you tend to be gratuitously repetitive.

#55575

Adam Lee is at it again. He compares Sarkeesian with Salman Rushdie.

http://www.donotlink.com/c5mc

Wasn't he banging Twatson at some point?

#55576

katamari Damassi wrote:You guys seen this yet?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... =FB1013_03

It's pretty interesting. The researcher reveals himself a shitlord when he describes different effects in males and females.

Well, I haven't read the article yet, but my asshole kitteh just climbed up on my shoulder and dug her nails in as I was trying to play LOTRO!!!!
So yes, she is making me crazy.

#55577

Nec_V20 wrote:
Parody Accountant wrote:I'm convinced Nec is an atheism+ troll.
You think that every cunt is a troll so hey, stop the presses "PA thinks Nec is a troll"

I have noticed that you have a limited vocabulary so you tend to be gratuitously repetitive.

When have I ever said that a slymepitter was trolling? To my recollection, I've never done that.

I bet you five autisms that you can't find a serious, reasonable example in my post history.

#55578

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Nec: really, at this point, either try to pretend to understand Pit humor, or take a break. There's not many things pertaining to lulz as bad as someone needing some detailed explanation for every single joke they don't get.

Phil's just kidding.

#55579

Nec_V20 wrote:
Monitors have what is known as a "rise time" (going from black to white) and a "fall time" (going from white to black) the rise time is a lot slower than the fall time. The thing is that you don't have very much black-white-black strobing but rather from some value of the 0 (black)-255(white) to another value of 0 - 255. The refresh rate is how long the pixel will stay in the state it is in, so no matter what you are looking at any change in the monitor takes 16.66 ms at 60 Hz. Within those 16.66 ms the monitor has to be able to transition from one grey state to another.

5 ms response time only gives the logic hardware of the monitor 11.66 ms to correctly display a new value. 2 ms response time gives the monitor 14.66 ms to correctly display the new value, and not only that but leave it there long enough for your eye to realise it.

There are however a number of milliseconds lost each time a pixel has to change state as I stated above.

That is honestly as simply as I can put it.

Bottom line this. Do I need to upgrade from 60hz to 120hz for a quality gaming monitor?

#55580

Nec_V20 wrote: Monitors have what is known as a "rise time" (going from black to white) and a "fall time" (going from white to black) the rise time is a lot slower than the fall time. The thing is that you don't have very much black-white-black strobing but rather from some value of the 0 (black)-255(white) to another value of 0 - 255. The refresh rate is how long the pixel will stay in the state it is in, so no matter what you are looking at any change in the monitor takes 16.66 ms at 60 Hz. Within those 16.66 ms the monitor has to be able to transition from one grey state to another.

5 ms response time only gives the logic hardware of the monitor 11.66 ms to correctly display a new value. 2 ms response time gives the monitor 14.66 ms to correctly display the new value, and not only that but leave it there long enough for your eye to realise it.

There are however a number of milliseconds lost each time a pixel has to change state as I stated above.

That is honestly as simply as I can put it.

Thank you. That's a good starting explanation. It seems there's analogy here to the phosphor persistence time in CRTs.

#55581

*caveat = trolling fulltime. not just a one off goof (like bhoytony was trolling you earlier tonight)

#55582

another lurker wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:You guys seen this yet?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... =FB1013_03

It's pretty interesting. The researcher reveals himself a shitlord when he describes different effects in males and females.
Well, I haven't read the article yet, but my asshole kitteh just climbed up on my shoulder and dug her nails in as I was trying to play LOTRO!!!!
So yes, she is making me crazy.

Your cat's at least subtle about it. My cat used to jump up and plonk himself across the keyboard and look at me as if to say, "Nothing is going to happen with this computer until you pay attention to me".

When he was finished he usually managed to kick the keyboard into the stand of my monitor on his way off my desk.

#55583

Nec_V20 wrote:
another lurker wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:You guys seen this yet?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... =FB1013_03

It's pretty interesting. The researcher reveals himself a shitlord when he describes different effects in males and females.
Well, I haven't read the article yet, but my asshole kitteh just climbed up on my shoulder and dug her nails in as I was trying to play LOTRO!!!!
So yes, she is making me crazy.
Your cat's at least subtle about it. My cat used to jump up and plonk himself across the keyboard and look at me as if to say, "Nothing is going to happen with this computer until you pay attention to me".

When he was finished he usually managed to kick the keyboard into the stand of my monitor on his way off my desk.

I always tell her that I am going to ebay her, but I haven't followed through with my threat!

#55584

dogen wrote:
Nec_V20 wrote: Monitors have what is known as a "rise time" (going from black to white) and a "fall time" (going from white to black) the rise time is a lot slower than the fall time. The thing is that you don't have very much black-white-black strobing but rather from some value of the 0 (black)-255(white) to another value of 0 - 255. The refresh rate is how long the pixel will stay in the state it is in, so no matter what you are looking at any change in the monitor takes 16.66 ms at 60 Hz. Within those 16.66 ms the monitor has to be able to transition from one grey state to another.

5 ms response time only gives the logic hardware of the monitor 11.66 ms to correctly display a new value. 2 ms response time gives the monitor 14.66 ms to correctly display the new value, and not only that but leave it there long enough for your eye to realise it.

There are however a number of milliseconds lost each time a pixel has to change state as I stated above.

That is honestly as simply as I can put it.
Thank you. That's a good starting explanation. It seems there's analogy here to the phosphor persistence time in CRTs.

It's a completely different reason, but yes it is analogous and actually a good way to look at it and I just wish I had thought of it.

That would have made the explanation simpler. Thank you for that.

#55585

jimthepleb wrote: Mykeru used as a verb obviously.

I always thought of it as a noun, as in 'the Mykeru is strong in this one.'

#55586

katamari Damassi wrote:Adam Lee is at it again. He compares Sarkeesian with Salman Rushdie.

http://www.donotlink.com/c5mc

Wasn't he banging Twatson at some point?

The kind of people who support Sarkeesian are the same kind of people who fretted about how Rushdie kinda sorta maybe brought it on himself by offending Muslims.

And no, Watson had a boyfriend named Adam Issak. Lee married one of his commenters several years ago. And fuck all yall for bringing this stupid rumor up so many times that I actually know who's who in this worthless little episode.

#55587

screwtape wrote:(I taught my autistic son to run Empathy v.1.0 in software in his head, as he just didn't have it hard-wired like most typies. I think he's up to v.2.9 now and has actually rewired his head enough that he actually feels some of the things he's supposed to feel. Sadly, I feel rather cruel for doing that to him....)

I think it's housing him in a plywood container for his first 18 months and making him peck at buttons for his food that you should be most ashamed of.

#55588

katamari Damassi wrote:Adam Lee is at it again. He compares Sarkeesian with Salman Rushdie.

I always think of her more as a Nelson Mandela, a MLK or a Ghandi.

katamari Damassi wrote:http://www.donotlink.com/c5mc

Wasn't he banging Twatson at some point?

Whatever, man - even Clarence has banged Twatson ...

#55589

Gefan wrote:
Parody Accountant wrote: ...[youtube]d5BdyIGtYcg[/youtube]...
Sweet Peezus' holy fuckballs! What in the blazing blue fuck was that?!?!

My, I wonder what Cyriak would make of that!

#55590

blitzem wrote:So, admittedly I haven't been following the Horde for very long, but has this latsot person been around for a while, and if so, has he always been this much of a useless pain in the ass? He seems to exist simply to start shit with people.

S/h/its been active for a long time. I remember s/h/it from the comment section of pharyngula but not when s/h/it became active. I was more interested in the creationist and religion threads over there and latsot was part of the gang you'd always find lurking in the sjw threads. I think its stepping up its game now, because I never remember it being particularly interesting or noteworthy when I used to hang out over there.

#55591

bhoytony wrote: If you try you might recall that there was a picture of a banana in the Radio Rental shop window for some reason. That caused Wonderbore to go off on some strange tangent about me calling him bananas or something.

Actually, Wonderist is still going off on that tangent....

#55592

John Greg wrote:Banned? You're not banned. What the fuck are you talking about?

He got banned at Atheism+. It's practically impossible to get banned at the Pit. It's practically impossible not to get banned at A+.

Three posts & out is the record over there. Held by someone sympathetic to Plussism. Got warned for using the word "dumb" (Rule 5.13c: Ableism -- impediments, speech); got banned for responding, "that's just stupid."

Hard to beat that. One & out wouldn't count -- you could just be a raging, foul-mouthed asshole. Two would be genius.

#55593

PZ Meyers has a post about Mykeru's video and "Where's PZ" challenge, in which he makes out like he's Billy Bigballs who don't give a shit about what others say about him.

It's the usual blustering from Little Paul. Boring.

But I just wanted to give a shout out to this comment. I love it when a straight-faced prude describes the shocking things they have seen in serious, sober terms. Cracks me up every time!!!!!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

http://i.imgur.com/tyf7ZCD.png

#55594

another lurker wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:You guys seen this yet?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... =FB1013_03

It's pretty interesting. The researcher reveals himself a shitlord when he describes different effects in males and females.
Well, I haven't read the article yet, but my asshole kitteh just climbed up on my shoulder and dug her nails in as I was trying to play LOTRO!!!!
So yes, she is making me crazy.

Brandywine glff forever. Fuck /World chat.

#55595

kk, ty Jack, Old_ones and Tigzy....I was just curious about his history...sounds like a real gem.

#55596

KiwiInOz wrote:
bhoytony wrote:
http://i.imgur.com/QESodov.png
You glorious bastard.

That's our Alex!!!

#55597

blitzem wrote:
another lurker wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:You guys seen this yet?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... =FB1013_03

It's pretty interesting. The researcher reveals himself a shitlord when he describes different effects in males and females.
Well, I haven't read the article yet, but my asshole kitteh just climbed up on my shoulder and dug her nails in as I was trying to play LOTRO!!!!
So yes, she is making me crazy.
Brandywine glff forever. Fuck /World chat.

Meneldor, bitch. Wasn't gonna play tonight but the fucking fall festival started.

#55598

tina wrote:MN update: Latsot has now repeated on his blog his allegation that I defend rapists, writing â€œThis is what I mean when I say that Michael Nugent defends rapists. Itâ€™s what I always meant. I stand by it. I didnâ€™t apologise for that and I donâ€™t apologise for it now.â€ He has written of his previous Twitter apology: â€œIt was a not-pology: sorry you thought thatâ€™s what I what I said. Sorry if I came across that way. But what I said stands.â€ Here is Latsotâ€™s up-to-date allegation.http://lookatthestateofthat.blogspot.co ... gents.html

Ba ha ha. From the comments:

Jesse wrote:Tell me something, Latsot, why are you providing a haven for rapists in your comments section? I see two of them already.

latsot wrote:Explain.

#55599

Nec_V20 wrote: I'm picturing a mouse stimming, and it's adorable.

Is that like kangaroo rat shtupping?

#55600

another lurker wrote:
blitzem wrote:
Brandywine glff forever. Fuck /World chat.
Meneldor, bitch. Wasn't gonna play tonight but the fucking fall festival started.

Lol, I played on that server in the original closed beta, but then I headed for the problem-child realm of BW. Hmm, forgot about the festival, maybe I should log in too. Still have a lot of deeds to finish for that one.

#55601

Gefan wrote:
Parody Accountant wrote:Wow... just saw Nec's latest.

What the shit? You're being a baby, man.

http://i.imgur.com/cvABmSr.jpg
The resemblance to Andrew Sullivan is un-nerving.

Including the soiled diapers?

#55602

Comic calls Cosby a rapist.

http://gawker.com/hannibal-buress-calle ... 1648541091

#55603

Gefan wrote:
Parody Accountant wrote:Wow... just saw Nec's latest.

What the shit? You're being a baby, man.

http://i.imgur.com/cvABmSr.jpg
The resemblance to Andrew Sullivan is un-nerving.

But the baby isn't crying.

LurkerPerson · #55604

Ok, so this Nec20 guy got banned from A+ for suggesting his autism is some kind of superpower and "normos" are barely above the level of bacteria when compared to his amazing analytical prowess?
Then he (apparently seriously) suggests he's being treated like a "house nigger" because the pit is not accomodating enough to his obviously off the fucking charts level of autism. Why are we treating this douchebag with kiddy gloves again?

#55605

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
screwtape wrote:(I taught my autistic son to run Empathy v.1.0 in software in his head, as he just didn't have it hard-wired like most typies. I think he's up to v.2.9 now and has actually rewired his head enough that he actually feels some of the things he's supposed to feel. Sadly, I feel rather cruel for doing that to him....)
I think it's housing him in a plywood container for his first 18 months and making him peck at buttons for his food that you should be most ashamed of.

I used to joke that my mom kept me in a Skinner box when I was a baby, as a project for her child development degree. For some reason she didn't appreciate that joke.

screwtape's story about his son made me think of this film. At one point in the film the father says that his autistic son was "isolated from his peers," and now he is not. I have mixed feelings about the film, in part because I've met the family at horsey events, and also in part because I've really liked every autistic kid I've worked with in therapeutic riding programs, even if they don't "improve" in any obvious way. Of course I don't have to live with them 24/7.

#55606

Latsot is going for the 'look over there' strategy by saying on twitter he is being threatened (according to a post at his blog) Why do they all do that rather than address the simple questions regarding their claims? Could it be because they can't answer them? Surly not. If they are so sure about their facts that they are outraged they must have some evidence no?

If they can't block they lie. If they can't lie they distract. Does it ever occur to them that any belief needing such tactics to support is highly questionable?

#55607

Oggie writes more racy recollections:

Ogvorbis

20 October 2014 at 11:20 am

When I was in college, one of my classmates was caught plagiarizing and was failed in that course. Other professors then went back to other papers she had written, discovered large plagiarized sections, and she was kicked out of school. The rapists (they didnâ€™t call it rape, of course â€” she was drunk and passed out, she eventually said yes, she kept saying no but her eyes said yes, she had an orgasm, so it wasnâ€™t rape) stayed in school. And graduated. So WithinThisMind at #1 makes sense.

Not sure if the ejected classmate was also the victim of the gang rape. Presumably Oggie will recover some more hidden memories and fill in the gaps in the story. What are the chances he was one of the rapists but the professor that failed the victim abused him into doing it?

#55608

Skep tickle wrote:
tina wrote:MN update: Latsot has now repeated on his blog his allegation that I defend rapists, writing â€œThis is what I mean when I say that Michael Nugent defends rapists. Itâ€™s what I always meant. I stand by it. I didnâ€™t apologise for that and I donâ€™t apologise for it now.â€ He has written of his previous Twitter apology: â€œIt was a not-pology: sorry you thought thatâ€™s what I what I said. Sorry if I came across that way. But what I said stands.â€ Here is Latsotâ€™s up-to-date allegation.http://lookatthestateofthat.blogspot.co ... gents.html
Ba ha ha. From the comments:
Jesse wrote:Tell me something, Latsot, why are you providing a haven for rapists in your comments section? I see two of them already.
latsot wrote:Explain.

:lol: Love it.

#55609

Lol:

'I'm shocked at you latsot. I used to think you were an ally. Now I know you are all too eager to give these rapists a safe-space to spew their rape-apologetics.

You are worse than the way ducks mate.

Fuck you forever at thunderdome from now on.'

#55610

Lsuoma and Parsehole:

I think you'll like this. Check out the word over Ian Hislop's left shoulder on the latest series of HIGNFY:

http://i.imgur.com/1kUBnZo.png

#55611

LurkerPerson wrote:Ok, so this Nec20 guy got banned from A+ for suggesting his autism is some kind of superpower and "normos" are barely above the level of bacteria when compared to his amazing analytical prowess?
Then he (apparently seriously) suggests he's being treated like a "house nigger" because the pit is not accomodating enough to his obviously off the fucking charts level of autism. Why are we treating this douchebag with kiddy gloves again?

#55612

Nec_V20 wrote:For 60 Hz to be displayed correctly it would the require a monitor to be capable of a 1.66 ms grey to grey response rate.

Your eyes do not only have RGB receptors but also much more sensitive greyscale receptors which are a lot more sensitive than the the colour ones. Often when playing games the ambient light is reduced so that the main light source is the monitor.

It's actually the difference in the retinal ganglia that carry information from the rods vs cones from the eye, along with differences in the way-stations (in the lateral geniculate) that are responsible for the shorter integration time for what you're calling "greyscale" vision, but I agree that B&W vision is faster and more temporally-precise than color vision.

#55613

LurkerPerson wrote:Ok, so this Nec20 guy got banned from A+ for suggesting his autism is some kind of superpower and "normos" are barely above the level of bacteria when compared to his amazing analytical prowess?

NEC was actually banned for repeatedly ignoring their rules when repeatedly told to stop.

For example, after told to stop being "ableist" and insulting, NEC wrote "amoeba have a greater cognitive ability than these muppets."

Although, NEC's claims to have died and come back from the dead should have provided at least one extra get-out-of-jail-free card, IMO.

#55614

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:Lsuoma and Parsehole:

I think you'll like this. Check out the word over Ian Hislop's left shoulder on the latest series of HIGNFY:

http://i.imgur.com/1kUBnZo.png

The Svanatee finally hit it big, I see.

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003265 ... xlarge.png

#55615

Also, I see the words 'tears' (or is that 'fears'?) and 'loon'. So Benson made it in there, too.

#55616

LurkerPerson wrote:Ok, so this Nec20 guy got banned from A+ for suggesting his autism is some kind of superpower and "normos" are barely above the level of bacteria when compared to his amazing analytical prowess?
Then he (apparently seriously) suggests he's being treated like a "house nigger" because the pit is not accomodating enough to his obviously off the fucking charts level of autism. Why are we treating this douchebag with kiddy gloves again?

Not sure we're treating him with kiddy gloves. The consensus appears to be that he's a tedious asshole. That doesn't mean he doesn't have a place here. One of the things I like about the pit is its tolerance, and perhaps even affection towards, pretty much everyone.

#55617

download/file.php?avatar=1096_1406627022.jpg https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/imag ... klcoF1CAEE https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/imag ... 8wZYrnLw1Q

#55618

Lsuoma wrote:
Gefan wrote:
Parody Accountant wrote: ...[youtube]d5BdyIGtYcg[/youtube]...
Sweet Peezus' holy fuckballs! What in the blazing blue fuck was that?!?!
My, I wonder what Cyriak would make of that!

And Abbie is way hotter than this personage. What were you thinking PA.

#55619

I put NEC on ignore when it became clear that...well, whatever. But it kind of defeats the purpose when so much of the conversation now seems to be about him.

Can we just agree that he's kind of a badly-threaded wingnut and move on?

#55620

katamari Damassi wrote:
BarnOwl wrote:Some of the past talks at HK Skeptics in the Pub look pretty interesting. The one scheduled for Oct 28 is intriguing:

http://www.meetup.com/Skeptics-in-the-Pub-HK/

Wonder what RW will talk about? There's no title listed:

http://skeptics.hk/

I think the most dishonest aspect of the description is that she labels herself an "activist."
It also dishonest to use what appears to be a 10 year-old glamour shot in her profile. I'd love to see the looks on their faces when she walks in. And again when she tries to speak about something other than her "harassment".

*shrug* the use of an old (good) photo isn't that uncommon, and I'm going to guess that skeptics in Hong Kong have access to this thing called "internet" that will have provided many of them some exposure to recent photos, videos, etc, so they've seen more recent images. ;)

She can be witty & engaging, presumably easiest when a friendly audience sits back & lets her entertain them with her POV.