The General Chit Chat Thread 2

[Havoc10K]

Gambling can be hazardous.

[Soryon]

Can also be fun as hell.

* Soryon is a regular casino visitor.

Just gotta know when to call it quits and plan ahead so you don't spend too much. Ive been lucky, personally, but I do know some people who have lost a lot gambling, but those are the ones who always think "oh, this next hand will be different!"
Also, you should go for attractions as well. Its kinda lame to go and just sit at a blackjack table all night.

[elvikun]

(click to show/hide)

[Saras]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

60 - 3.5%
65 - 2.5%
70 - 2.2%

On average, 8.2% of the Roman population was over the age of 60. Which makes one in every 12 Romans. I'd say that nets us more than 10 000.

As for the recent history.

Here's a picture of an Iraqi born in 1788, the picture was taken in 1895.

Well. Now bring them here and make them prove their age. That's what said.

...
And while you'll be bringing them, you could explain to me what does it all have to do with tardyness of teenegers and lower rate of marriages  today, because I'm still missing that part

How about the opposite, give me proof that a 60 year old or for that matter a 50 year old skeleton pre the 18th century world was an unheard of miracle of archaeology.
...
Which is something I never tried to answer or even questioned you about.

Hmm. Firstly, I'd disagree that you weren't expected to live together for more than a few years. Given ones life expectancy if you actually managed to get to a marritable age and given that families of those times were expected to have an amount of children numbering well north of 10. Unless twins are 10 times as common as I thought, I'd say you'd be at the very least expected to live together for a decade and at most to about two.

It'd say that current tardiness is more to due to the view of marriage rather than anything else. Your feelings on the subject of your spouse ranked somewhere between "cry some moar" and "tough shit, luv" in those times. Being single would nearly certainly mean that'd you'd starve be shunned by the community and that the holy union was more of an economical and political deal you had because you were told to more than anything else. Not to mention that just generally "I want x" mattered to the world and the ones around you about as much as that fly I swatted 15 minutes ago.

In comparison, current marriages, at the very least those without children, are binding only to the point of petty feelings. Given such a change, I'd say it's natural for marriages to become a less time consuming endeavour.

Also. I would also say that the divorce rates aren't exactly all telling either. After all, a happily married family only counts as one marriage, and a dick or a whore who remarried and redivorced 6 times count as 6. I would like too see the difference between the statistics of the chance for an individual to find a happy marriage compared to overall average divorce rates. But I'm far too tired to do that.

Hey, if I said "Bring me rainbow bunny who poops gold" would you still continue with serious answers?

Well. I have said it was usually not (expected) for more than 20 years, rarely 30. You say two decades. That's kinda... funny. But don't forget getting married at 12 +-  wasn't exactly rare.
Either way in the past it was a thing of strategy, union or conviniece and perhaps religion with little choice for the married individuals while today it is a thing of joy for most. Which is why there are divorces, and say what you will, there are times more than there used to be few decades back. Old generations tied by traditions dying out I guess.

And while some are what you said, I don't think someone who remaries several times  has to be any kind of dick or whore. Do you call anyone who had more than, say, 5 partners overly whore-ish? Those people are just shortsighted and shouldn't get married so fast at the first place. In many case it has a lot to do with being stuck beween two worlds, on one side "You have to marry the person you like to be with them, so the god wills" and othe the other "It's ok to divorce". Simplified.

Why should everyone spend life with one person anyway? To perfect mastery of boredom?
But that is all subjective as it gets and varies localy.

I'm not sure the tardyness of teenagers is caused by today's view of marriage tho. Erm.

...Probably. It's in my nature.

I only remembered a post of yours saying "a few years". If you wish, I'll rethink and rephrase my argument once I get some sleep.

Partners? No. 1-2 Marriages: probably not, if more: probably yes. Perhaps not a whore or a dick, but someone who shouldn't marry for sure. However, as I've said a few times ago, I've been raised in a very traditional manner and I kind of naturally put a sort of importance on said event fairly rare nowadays and to be honest, divorces are very rare in my social circles, even thought I'm from the country that currently holds the largest divorce rates in the EU. I can only think of three examples of it throughout the people I constantly interact with or the people my parents do. So my view on the subject is likely a bit skewed. And, to my amusement, the only thing I've actively been taught about marriages is to not choose my partners on the basis of affection.

Personally, I'm not really interested in the prospects of playing the dating game or the hunt for decades. I've got many vices and interests. There are days where I simply want to put a check and shove the issue to the "solved problems" bin and retire to my other pursuits.

Perhaps, however that's what my reasoning told me in the ten minutes I've bothered to think about the topic. If you got another answer, feel free to share.

I'm not even sure I actually said anything about "just a few years". I said not 50, 30 is unique and over 20 rare. Well. Was, not is.
Well, I'm not big fan of marriage in any form, age or for any reason, but good half of people who get divorced shouldn't got married at the first place. Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go.

But looking at some of the older pairs who are together for 40, 50 years ... Divorce at the right time can be a good thing. Why force it like that. I think that it's in nature of humankind to dislike person you spent several years in one room with. Sure, there still might be mutual respect and such, but still.

But still, I can't believe you'd go that far because of like 15 years old movie joke 

I have no memory of you saying either of those. Weird, oh well. And as I said, that's not an occurrence that happens in my life. The youngest couple I know of that married is my sister who was 26 at the time, and I believe that she knew her spouse for well over two years by then. The example you are giving me is one my mind analyses in the same group as those stupid home videos or bugs bunny cartoons.

I do not deny such a possibility.

What movie?

...Example of what?

Either way, the point was... when marriage was "designed", it was not expected to last for 50+ years. Not even 30. Not even 20, in most cases.

Close enough?

No idea what movie. It was a comedy I presume. Over 10 years old, most likely. And it was said in a park. But the quote was enjoyable enough to remember, while the movie itself wasn't as it seems.

"Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go."

I suppose.

I have no memory of such a thing. Oh well, I suppose there is a possibility that my mind picked it up subconsciously. However, the probability of that is fairly low, as my childhood was more shaped on Soviet media such as Operatsiya Y, cartoon networks scooby doo and old 70's disney cartoons rather than American pop flicks. Either way, I don't think it matters either way, even if I did end up getting that view point because of that movie. I suppose I could've gotten worse things.

[undetz]

(click to show/hide)

They don't look like they are...

[TiYlER]

(click to show/hide)

Oh god I need to watch Dog Days...

[elvikun]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

60 - 3.5%
65 - 2.5%
70 - 2.2%

On average, 8.2% of the Roman population was over the age of 60. Which makes one in every 12 Romans. I'd say that nets us more than 10 000.

As for the recent history.

Here's a picture of an Iraqi born in 1788, the picture was taken in 1895.

Well. Now bring them here and make them prove their age. That's what said.

...
And while you'll be bringing them, you could explain to me what does it all have to do with tardyness of teenegers and lower rate of marriages  today, because I'm still missing that part

How about the opposite, give me proof that a 60 year old or for that matter a 50 year old skeleton pre the 18th century world was an unheard of miracle of archaeology.
...
Which is something I never tried to answer or even questioned you about.

Hmm. Firstly, I'd disagree that you weren't expected to live together for more than a few years. Given ones life expectancy if you actually managed to get to a marritable age and given that families of those times were expected to have an amount of children numbering well north of 10. Unless twins are 10 times as common as I thought, I'd say you'd be at the very least expected to live together for a decade and at most to about two.

It'd say that current tardiness is more to due to the view of marriage rather than anything else. Your feelings on the subject of your spouse ranked somewhere between "cry some moar" and "tough shit, luv" in those times. Being single would nearly certainly mean that'd you'd starve be shunned by the community and that the holy union was more of an economical and political deal you had because you were told to more than anything else. Not to mention that just generally "I want x" mattered to the world and the ones around you about as much as that fly I swatted 15 minutes ago.

In comparison, current marriages, at the very least those without children, are binding only to the point of petty feelings. Given such a change, I'd say it's natural for marriages to become a less time consuming endeavour.

Also. I would also say that the divorce rates aren't exactly all telling either. After all, a happily married family only counts as one marriage, and a dick or a whore who remarried and redivorced 6 times count as 6. I would like too see the difference between the statistics of the chance for an individual to find a happy marriage compared to overall average divorce rates. But I'm far too tired to do that.

Hey, if I said "Bring me rainbow bunny who poops gold" would you still continue with serious answers?

Well. I have said it was usually not (expected) for more than 20 years, rarely 30. You say two decades. That's kinda... funny. But don't forget getting married at 12 +-  wasn't exactly rare.
Either way in the past it was a thing of strategy, union or conviniece and perhaps religion with little choice for the married individuals while today it is a thing of joy for most. Which is why there are divorces, and say what you will, there are times more than there used to be few decades back. Old generations tied by traditions dying out I guess.

And while some are what you said, I don't think someone who remaries several times  has to be any kind of dick or whore. Do you call anyone who had more than, say, 5 partners overly whore-ish? Those people are just shortsighted and shouldn't get married so fast at the first place. In many case it has a lot to do with being stuck beween two worlds, on one side "You have to marry the person you like to be with them, so the god wills" and othe the other "It's ok to divorce". Simplified.

Why should everyone spend life with one person anyway? To perfect mastery of boredom?
But that is all subjective as it gets and varies localy.

I'm not sure the tardyness of teenagers is caused by today's view of marriage tho. Erm.

...Probably. It's in my nature.

I only remembered a post of yours saying "a few years". If you wish, I'll rethink and rephrase my argument once I get some sleep.

Partners? No. 1-2 Marriages: probably not, if more: probably yes. Perhaps not a whore or a dick, but someone who shouldn't marry for sure. However, as I've said a few times ago, I've been raised in a very traditional manner and I kind of naturally put a sort of importance on said event fairly rare nowadays and to be honest, divorces are very rare in my social circles, even thought I'm from the country that currently holds the largest divorce rates in the EU. I can only think of three examples of it throughout the people I constantly interact with or the people my parents do. So my view on the subject is likely a bit skewed. And, to my amusement, the only thing I've actively been taught about marriages is to not choose my partners on the basis of affection.

Personally, I'm not really interested in the prospects of playing the dating game or the hunt for decades. I've got many vices and interests. There are days where I simply want to put a check and shove the issue to the "solved problems" bin and retire to my other pursuits.

Perhaps, however that's what my reasoning told me in the ten minutes I've bothered to think about the topic. If you got another answer, feel free to share.

I'm not even sure I actually said anything about "just a few years". I said not 50, 30 is unique and over 20 rare. Well. Was, not is.
Well, I'm not big fan of marriage in any form, age or for any reason, but good half of people who get divorced shouldn't got married at the first place. Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go.

But looking at some of the older pairs who are together for 40, 50 years ... Divorce at the right time can be a good thing. Why force it like that. I think that it's in nature of humankind to dislike person you spent several years in one room with. Sure, there still might be mutual respect and such, but still.

But still, I can't believe you'd go that far because of like 15 years old movie joke 

I have no memory of you saying either of those. Weird, oh well. And as I said, that's not an occurrence that happens in my life. The youngest couple I know of that married is my sister who was 26 at the time, and I believe that she knew her spouse for well over two years by then. The example you are giving me is one my mind analyses in the same group as those stupid home videos or bugs bunny cartoons.

I do not deny such a possibility.

What movie?

...Example of what?

Either way, the point was... when marriage was "designed", it was not expected to last for 50+ years. Not even 30. Not even 20, in most cases.

Close enough?

No idea what movie. It was a comedy I presume. Over 10 years old, most likely. And it was said in a park. But the quote was enjoyable enough to remember, while the movie itself wasn't as it seems.

"Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go."

I suppose.

I have no memory of such a thing. Oh well, I suppose there is a possibility that my mind picked it up subconsciously. However, the probability of that is fairly low, as my childhood was more shaped on Soviet media such as Operatsiya Y, cartoon networks scooby doo and old 70's disney cartoons rather than American pop flicks. Either way, I don't think it matters either way, even if I did end up getting that view point because of that movie. I suppose I could've gotten worse things.

Let's just bury it and never mention any of it again... After one last little thing.
Answer as trutfully as possible without going back in the thread.... How or rather why did we, as in us two, got into this sparkling debate?

(click to show/hide)

They don't look like they are...

Yes. That is the confusing part.

[Saras]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

60 - 3.5%
65 - 2.5%
70 - 2.2%

On average, 8.2% of the Roman population was over the age of 60. Which makes one in every 12 Romans. I'd say that nets us more than 10 000.

As for the recent history.

Here's a picture of an Iraqi born in 1788, the picture was taken in 1895.

Well. Now bring them here and make them prove their age. That's what said.

...
And while you'll be bringing them, you could explain to me what does it all have to do with tardyness of teenegers and lower rate of marriages  today, because I'm still missing that part

How about the opposite, give me proof that a 60 year old or for that matter a 50 year old skeleton pre the 18th century world was an unheard of miracle of archaeology.
...
Which is something I never tried to answer or even questioned you about.

Hmm. Firstly, I'd disagree that you weren't expected to live together for more than a few years. Given ones life expectancy if you actually managed to get to a marritable age and given that families of those times were expected to have an amount of children numbering well north of 10. Unless twins are 10 times as common as I thought, I'd say you'd be at the very least expected to live together for a decade and at most to about two.

It'd say that current tardiness is more to due to the view of marriage rather than anything else. Your feelings on the subject of your spouse ranked somewhere between "cry some moar" and "tough shit, luv" in those times. Being single would nearly certainly mean that'd you'd starve be shunned by the community and that the holy union was more of an economical and political deal you had because you were told to more than anything else. Not to mention that just generally "I want x" mattered to the world and the ones around you about as much as that fly I swatted 15 minutes ago.

In comparison, current marriages, at the very least those without children, are binding only to the point of petty feelings. Given such a change, I'd say it's natural for marriages to become a less time consuming endeavour.

Also. I would also say that the divorce rates aren't exactly all telling either. After all, a happily married family only counts as one marriage, and a dick or a whore who remarried and redivorced 6 times count as 6. I would like too see the difference between the statistics of the chance for an individual to find a happy marriage compared to overall average divorce rates. But I'm far too tired to do that.

Hey, if I said "Bring me rainbow bunny who poops gold" would you still continue with serious answers?

Well. I have said it was usually not (expected) for more than 20 years, rarely 30. You say two decades. That's kinda... funny. But don't forget getting married at 12 +-  wasn't exactly rare.
Either way in the past it was a thing of strategy, union or conviniece and perhaps religion with little choice for the married individuals while today it is a thing of joy for most. Which is why there are divorces, and say what you will, there are times more than there used to be few decades back. Old generations tied by traditions dying out I guess.

And while some are what you said, I don't think someone who remaries several times  has to be any kind of dick or whore. Do you call anyone who had more than, say, 5 partners overly whore-ish? Those people are just shortsighted and shouldn't get married so fast at the first place. In many case it has a lot to do with being stuck beween two worlds, on one side "You have to marry the person you like to be with them, so the god wills" and othe the other "It's ok to divorce". Simplified.

Why should everyone spend life with one person anyway? To perfect mastery of boredom?
But that is all subjective as it gets and varies localy.

I'm not sure the tardyness of teenagers is caused by today's view of marriage tho. Erm.

...Probably. It's in my nature.

I only remembered a post of yours saying "a few years". If you wish, I'll rethink and rephrase my argument once I get some sleep.

Partners? No. 1-2 Marriages: probably not, if more: probably yes. Perhaps not a whore or a dick, but someone who shouldn't marry for sure. However, as I've said a few times ago, I've been raised in a very traditional manner and I kind of naturally put a sort of importance on said event fairly rare nowadays and to be honest, divorces are very rare in my social circles, even thought I'm from the country that currently holds the largest divorce rates in the EU. I can only think of three examples of it throughout the people I constantly interact with or the people my parents do. So my view on the subject is likely a bit skewed. And, to my amusement, the only thing I've actively been taught about marriages is to not choose my partners on the basis of affection.

Personally, I'm not really interested in the prospects of playing the dating game or the hunt for decades. I've got many vices and interests. There are days where I simply want to put a check and shove the issue to the "solved problems" bin and retire to my other pursuits.

Perhaps, however that's what my reasoning told me in the ten minutes I've bothered to think about the topic. If you got another answer, feel free to share.

I'm not even sure I actually said anything about "just a few years". I said not 50, 30 is unique and over 20 rare. Well. Was, not is.
Well, I'm not big fan of marriage in any form, age or for any reason, but good half of people who get divorced shouldn't got married at the first place. Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go.

But looking at some of the older pairs who are together for 40, 50 years ... Divorce at the right time can be a good thing. Why force it like that. I think that it's in nature of humankind to dislike person you spent several years in one room with. Sure, there still might be mutual respect and such, but still.

But still, I can't believe you'd go that far because of like 15 years old movie joke 

I have no memory of you saying either of those. Weird, oh well. And as I said, that's not an occurrence that happens in my life. The youngest couple I know of that married is my sister who was 26 at the time, and I believe that she knew her spouse for well over two years by then. The example you are giving me is one my mind analyses in the same group as those stupid home videos or bugs bunny cartoons.

I do not deny such a possibility.

What movie?

...Example of what?

Either way, the point was... when marriage was "designed", it was not expected to last for 50+ years. Not even 30. Not even 20, in most cases.

Close enough?

No idea what movie. It was a comedy I presume. Over 10 years old, most likely. And it was said in a park. But the quote was enjoyable enough to remember, while the movie itself wasn't as it seems.

"Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go."

I suppose.

I have no memory of such a thing. Oh well, I suppose there is a possibility that my mind picked it up subconsciously. However, the probability of that is fairly low, as my childhood was more shaped on Soviet media such as Operatsiya Y, cartoon networks scooby doo and old 70's disney cartoons rather than American pop flicks. Either way, I don't think it matters either way, even if I did end up getting that view point because of that movie. I suppose I could've gotten worse things.

Let's just bury it and never mention any of it again... After one last little thing.
Answer as trutfully as possible without going back in the thread.... How or rather why did we, as in us two, got into this sparkling debate?

Hmm. "Cause I could?" That about sums up most of my debates on the internet.

[elvikun]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

60 - 3.5%
65 - 2.5%
70 - 2.2%

On average, 8.2% of the Roman population was over the age of 60. Which makes one in every 12 Romans. I'd say that nets us more than 10 000.

As for the recent history.

Here's a picture of an Iraqi born in 1788, the picture was taken in 1895.

Well. Now bring them here and make them prove their age. That's what said.

...
And while you'll be bringing them, you could explain to me what does it all have to do with tardyness of teenegers and lower rate of marriages  today, because I'm still missing that part

How about the opposite, give me proof that a 60 year old or for that matter a 50 year old skeleton pre the 18th century world was an unheard of miracle of archaeology.
...
Which is something I never tried to answer or even questioned you about.

Hmm. Firstly, I'd disagree that you weren't expected to live together for more than a few years. Given ones life expectancy if you actually managed to get to a marritable age and given that families of those times were expected to have an amount of children numbering well north of 10. Unless twins are 10 times as common as I thought, I'd say you'd be at the very least expected to live together for a decade and at most to about two.

It'd say that current tardiness is more to due to the view of marriage rather than anything else. Your feelings on the subject of your spouse ranked somewhere between "cry some moar" and "tough shit, luv" in those times. Being single would nearly certainly mean that'd you'd starve be shunned by the community and that the holy union was more of an economical and political deal you had because you were told to more than anything else. Not to mention that just generally "I want x" mattered to the world and the ones around you about as much as that fly I swatted 15 minutes ago.

In comparison, current marriages, at the very least those without children, are binding only to the point of petty feelings. Given such a change, I'd say it's natural for marriages to become a less time consuming endeavour.

Also. I would also say that the divorce rates aren't exactly all telling either. After all, a happily married family only counts as one marriage, and a dick or a whore who remarried and redivorced 6 times count as 6. I would like too see the difference between the statistics of the chance for an individual to find a happy marriage compared to overall average divorce rates. But I'm far too tired to do that.

Hey, if I said "Bring me rainbow bunny who poops gold" would you still continue with serious answers?

Well. I have said it was usually not (expected) for more than 20 years, rarely 30. You say two decades. That's kinda... funny. But don't forget getting married at 12 +-  wasn't exactly rare.
Either way in the past it was a thing of strategy, union or conviniece and perhaps religion with little choice for the married individuals while today it is a thing of joy for most. Which is why there are divorces, and say what you will, there are times more than there used to be few decades back. Old generations tied by traditions dying out I guess.

And while some are what you said, I don't think someone who remaries several times  has to be any kind of dick or whore. Do you call anyone who had more than, say, 5 partners overly whore-ish? Those people are just shortsighted and shouldn't get married so fast at the first place. In many case it has a lot to do with being stuck beween two worlds, on one side "You have to marry the person you like to be with them, so the god wills" and othe the other "It's ok to divorce". Simplified.

Why should everyone spend life with one person anyway? To perfect mastery of boredom?
But that is all subjective as it gets and varies localy.

I'm not sure the tardyness of teenagers is caused by today's view of marriage tho. Erm.

...Probably. It's in my nature.

I only remembered a post of yours saying "a few years". If you wish, I'll rethink and rephrase my argument once I get some sleep.

Partners? No. 1-2 Marriages: probably not, if more: probably yes. Perhaps not a whore or a dick, but someone who shouldn't marry for sure. However, as I've said a few times ago, I've been raised in a very traditional manner and I kind of naturally put a sort of importance on said event fairly rare nowadays and to be honest, divorces are very rare in my social circles, even thought I'm from the country that currently holds the largest divorce rates in the EU. I can only think of three examples of it throughout the people I constantly interact with or the people my parents do. So my view on the subject is likely a bit skewed. And, to my amusement, the only thing I've actively been taught about marriages is to not choose my partners on the basis of affection.

Personally, I'm not really interested in the prospects of playing the dating game or the hunt for decades. I've got many vices and interests. There are days where I simply want to put a check and shove the issue to the "solved problems" bin and retire to my other pursuits.

Perhaps, however that's what my reasoning told me in the ten minutes I've bothered to think about the topic. If you got another answer, feel free to share.

I'm not even sure I actually said anything about "just a few years". I said not 50, 30 is unique and over 20 rare. Well. Was, not is.
Well, I'm not big fan of marriage in any form, age or for any reason, but good half of people who get divorced shouldn't got married at the first place. Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go.

But looking at some of the older pairs who are together for 40, 50 years ... Divorce at the right time can be a good thing. Why force it like that. I think that it's in nature of humankind to dislike person you spent several years in one room with. Sure, there still might be mutual respect and such, but still.

But still, I can't believe you'd go that far because of like 15 years old movie joke 

I have no memory of you saying either of those. Weird, oh well. And as I said, that's not an occurrence that happens in my life. The youngest couple I know of that married is my sister who was 26 at the time, and I believe that she knew her spouse for well over two years by then. The example you are giving me is one my mind analyses in the same group as those stupid home videos or bugs bunny cartoons.

I do not deny such a possibility.

What movie?

...Example of what?

Either way, the point was... when marriage was "designed", it was not expected to last for 50+ years. Not even 30. Not even 20, in most cases.

Close enough?

No idea what movie. It was a comedy I presume. Over 10 years old, most likely. And it was said in a park. But the quote was enjoyable enough to remember, while the movie itself wasn't as it seems.

"Hey, you're 20, I'm 20, we know each other for almost two weeks, let's get married! ... Ya. I wonder how that will go."

I suppose.

I have no memory of such a thing. Oh well, I suppose there is a possibility that my mind picked it up subconsciously. However, the probability of that is fairly low, as my childhood was more shaped on Soviet media such as Operatsiya Y, cartoon networks scooby doo and old 70's disney cartoons rather than American pop flicks. Either way, I don't think it matters either way, even if I did end up getting that view point because of that movie. I suppose I could've gotten worse things.

Let's just bury it and never mention any of it again... After one last little thing.
Answer as trutfully as possible without going back in the thread.... How or rather why did we, as in us two, got into this sparkling debate?

Hmm. "Cause I could?" That about sums up most of my debates on the internet.

Oh, well, I meant more from what topic.

[Saras]

Dunno, can't remember. I've long since stopped caring about that.

[elvikun]

That would explain a thing or two I wasn't quite sure about.

Either way, good hunting.

[EmptyMemory]

I love shrimp in my pasta.

[Havoc10K]

I love shrimp in my pasta.

Oh ?
*plans a scheme*

[elvikun]

I love shrimp in my pasta.

Hm. Shrimp... Pasta.... That could make a good start for a conversation about respecting old people.

[TiYlER]

I love shrimp in my pizza.

Meh, seafood is gross. I prefer mine with only cheese and pepperoni.

[Soryon]

Meh, seafood is gross.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are only referring to seafood as a pizza topping, because I cant say whether you are right or wrong. Only had anchovies once and don't really remember what it was like and I don't know anywhere that sells pizza with other types of seafood as a topping.

However, seafood in general is the best. Fact.

[TiYlER]

However, seafood in general is the best. Fact.

D:
I only like crab, lobster, fried tilapia, and clams.

[Burkingam]

I eat vegetarian pizza because I love veggies.

And I don't like seafood I wish I would because it's actually quite healthy.

[TiYlER]

I love vegetables as well. I just dislike most seafood. Maybe I was given too many fishsticks as a child and it scarred me for life...

I love eggs, so Easter is a great time of year for me. Plus I get tons of candy and money :/

[elvikun]

I guess easter is cool, but once you reach certain age it's only because there's a free day. No money, no sweets *sniff*