WAR ROOM LOUNGE V14: Moor of the Saim

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just did some sidestep after coming out of the bathroom with a dude who looked like Cowboy Cerrone. Anybody know if he's on big island?
 
Just did some sidestep after coming out of the bathroom with a dude who looked like Cowboy Cerrone. Anybody know if he's on big island?
Was his body exceptionally tight?
 
I was more looking at his cock. You know. Trying to determine if there's a real there's threat or something.

Careful with blasphemy Mr. SC:OHVCURHealigfapfryilabfgvregbag.... You must be able to study the body with the cynosure of ones environment. Even if it wasn't Mr. Cerrone, you should have been able to make new friends and awaken new receptors towards the shards of our desires.... Shards of The Nexus...
 
I have to refrain my tight flesh.... I do not want to go into a frenzy...

Your flesh is in charge?


noted-ryan-the-office.gif
 
. A lower crime rate means that people are less likely to be victimized by crime, which should be the goal.
No. In traditional analysis, utility maximization is always the goal.

Additionally, you're assigning no value to a crime-free existence.
False.

You're *only* looking at negative utility and then noting that a higher total number of people increases it.

Let us model our problem to wrap this up.

Society A consists of 100 people on a fixed plot of land. 10% of its people are criminals (10 criminals). Each criminal commits one crime per year. All crimes are the same and target only one person.

Society A is deciding whether to import 10000 people from society B. 8% of Society B's people are criminals (800 criminals). In this special case, immigrants from Society B bring no extra benefits to Society A. Their cuisine is horrible, their women are unattractive, they don't work or pay taxes, and so on. Question: is it rational to import these people?

You are saying 'yes', because the crime rate post-immigration will fall from 10% to about 8%*. Each member of Society A will be almost 20% less likely to be criminalized post-immigration. Therefore, you say, the immigration is desirable.

My view is that benefit to Society A of its people being less likely to be criminalized is dwarfed by the costs to Society A's taxpayers to pay for law enforcement, health care, schooling, welfare, and other public services.


*Here I am granting you the generous assumption that Society B's criminals don't preferentially target Society A's people.
 
Last edited:
when I was single, virginity would be very close to a deal-breaker

In my younger days, you would have been a great wingman. Divide and conquer. You target the womyn with the thousand-cock stare, I get the fair maidens.
 
I also don't get why he doesn't just say, "I'm most attracted to women with no sexual experience." Phrasing it in terms of "marketplace value" is just creepy as shit.

Meh, SMV is a thing on the netz these days. I don't really believe in SMV, but for throwaway conversations on a karate forum, it's good enough.
 
Creepy it is, reminded me of a weird poster back in the day named Eugenicist, remember him? That dude was a piece of work.

What I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around is how a girl built like a 12 year old boy is the paragon of femininity while this...

is "mannish". I mean I just don't even...

Is that the attention whore from the video? Glamour shots don't count bro. That's how they trick you. She did her best to look good in her mugshot, but you could already see a lot of the flaws come out. Just imagine if she were forced to forgo makeup.

CpzENn9UMAAjbtK.jpg


Look at that chin. She's trying to one-up Jay Leno with that thing.

I know this variety of female very well. Average looking but obsessed with attention. Finds the best cosmetic products, camera angles, photoshop gurus. Finds a niche full of incels (gamer dorks) and goes wild. She's probably made millions off of the masturbatory needs of the @Jack V Savage s of the world.
 
Also, it must be said, I may be detecting the beginnings of the dreaded thousand-cock stare:

 
and some of the claims--like that Trump has been bellicose in dealings with Russia--he'll defend

I gave multiple reasons why this is the case, and you failed to offer a counter-argument. You're in a very weak position if you choose to take the other side in that one. Better to concede, imo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top