As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Black Lives Matter

18182848687100

Posts

  • Options
    MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

  • Options
    A Dabble Of TheloniusA Dabble Of Thelonius It has been a doozy of a dayRegistered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    That's such a fucked up thing, too. The drawing of what should be neutral parties into complete leo controlled subsidies is such garbage.

    vm8gvf5p7gqi.jpg
    Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
  • Options
    OghulkOghulk Tinychat Janitor TinychatRegistered User regular
    Yeah , there's a lot of ways the structure of medical examination/law enforcement can be used to further LE biases.

    At least here our ME's office is entirely separate

  • Options
    ElaroElaro Apologetic Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    That's such a fucked up thing, too. The drawing of what should be neutral parties into complete leo controlled subsidies is such garbage.

    Limited Government!

    ... means we only have enough budget for one guy person in our justice system. Guess they'll have to wear several hats *points at the hats labeled "judge", "jury", "executioner"*, but God forbid we actually provide adequate, tax-requiring services to our community, am I right?

    Children's rights are human rights.
  • Options
    cj iwakuracj iwakura The Rhythm Regent Bears The Name FreedomRegistered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    Definitely not in Broward. Way too big a population.

    wVEsyIc.png
  • Options
    OghulkOghulk Tinychat Janitor TinychatRegistered User regular
    Elaro wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    That's such a fucked up thing, too. The drawing of what should be neutral parties into complete leo controlled subsidies is such garbage.

    Limited Government!

    ... means we only have enough budget for one guy person in our justice system. Guess they'll have to wear several hats *points at the hats labeled "judge", "jury", "executioner"*, but God forbid we actually provide adequate, tax-requiring services to our community, am I right?

    Less limited government, more fiscal federalism. When you've got a county with 70 people in it and only the properties/residents within the county pay for government services you're inevitably going to have much fewer services.

  • Options
    MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    Definitely not in Broward. Way too big a population.

    Same in Los Angeles. Though in those cases the sheriff just overrules the coroner or tries to seal the results.

  • Options
    ElaroElaro Apologetic Registered User regular
    Oghulk wrote: »
    Elaro wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    That's such a fucked up thing, too. The drawing of what should be neutral parties into complete leo controlled subsidies is such garbage.

    Limited Government!

    ... means we only have enough budget for one guy person in our justice system. Guess they'll have to wear several hats *points at the hats labeled "judge", "jury", "executioner"*, but God forbid we actually provide adequate, tax-requiring services to our community, am I right?

    Less limited government, more fiscal federalism. When you've got a county with 70 people in it and only the properties/residents within the county pay for government services you're inevitably going to have much fewer services.

    Sounds like a job for...

    adequately distributing funds at the state level rather than letting each county fend for itself! ADFATSLRTLECFFI! It won't fit on a t-shirt, but by goodness it's what you need!

    Children's rights are human rights.
  • Options
    OghulkOghulk Tinychat Janitor TinychatRegistered User regular
    Elaro wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    Elaro wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    That's such a fucked up thing, too. The drawing of what should be neutral parties into complete leo controlled subsidies is such garbage.

    Limited Government!

    ... means we only have enough budget for one guy person in our justice system. Guess they'll have to wear several hats *points at the hats labeled "judge", "jury", "executioner"*, but God forbid we actually provide adequate, tax-requiring services to our community, am I right?

    Less limited government, more fiscal federalism. When you've got a county with 70 people in it and only the properties/residents within the county pay for government services you're inevitably going to have much fewer services.

    Sounds like a job for...

    adequately distributing funds at the state level rather than letting each county fend for itself! ADFATSLRTLECFFI! It won't fit on a t-shirt, but by goodness it's what you need!

    I mean, you're right, which is why I'd push more for state and federal revenue sharing than the current dumb grant system we have.

  • Options
    KelorKelor Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    There's no shortage of cases when csi techs proved the innocence of a subject only for that analysis to be shelved/hodden from thr court.

    They are not valid subject for critique as their works is ideally done from a scientifically neutral standpoint

    My original post was about how CSI:BULLSHIT turned them into an army of sherlock holms

    https://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=61. Hence that comic

    But still, they can get drawn into that niche mindset, i forget the English for it, a clique? Where a collective of officers, prosecutors, judges, etc. Get into a massive circle jerk of cases and results, blurring the lines of independence?

    As I recall, it's explicitly not allowed to hide exonerating evidence, too. Not that this stops the government, but.

    But if you do it can lead to becoming Vice-President.

    Don’t let you dreams be dreams.

  • Options
    RoyceSraphimRoyceSraphim Registered User regular
    Oghulk wrote: »
    Elaro wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    Elaro wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    yeah I think it's important to frame it as "a CSI should have no stake or influence" because the fact is, there is constant pressure from the prosecution side to make sure the evidence helps, or at least doesn't hurt, their case

    I don't know about the validity of things like blood spatter analysis and all that in a vacuum, but in the real world it will always be used to support the cops' version of what happened (or what they want to have happened) and if it absolutely can't do that or directly contradicts their account, they'll just find a way to make it disappear whenever possible

    We actually had an medical examiner guest speaker on a case where something like that happened, and as the lead ME, her word was law; she ruled it as a homicide, and they wanted it open and shut as a suicide. The ME has to sign off on the cause of death, at least in Florida.

    In a lot of cities the sheriff is also the medical examiner/coroner.

    That's such a fucked up thing, too. The drawing of what should be neutral parties into complete leo controlled subsidies is such garbage.

    Limited Government!

    ... means we only have enough budget for one guy person in our justice system. Guess they'll have to wear several hats *points at the hats labeled "judge", "jury", "executioner"*, but God forbid we actually provide adequate, tax-requiring services to our community, am I right?

    Less limited government, more fiscal federalism. When you've got a county with 70 people in it and only the properties/residents within the county pay for government services you're inevitably going to have much fewer services.

    Sounds like a job for...

    adequately distributing funds at the state level rather than letting each county fend for itself! ADFATSLRTLECFFI! It won't fit on a t-shirt, but by goodness it's what you need!

    I mean, you're right, which is why I'd push more for state and federal revenue sharing than the current dumb grant system we have.

    Kinda funny how a lot of the legal troubles in this country come from bullshit financial arrangements that foster a feudal lord frontier town mindset among local governments and law enforcement

  • Options
    facetiousfacetious a wit so dry it shits sandRegistered User regular
    edited May 2022


    Democrats fucking love police.

    Also further down the thread it's pointed out that with other types of deaths - including 12 from "9/11 related illness"??? - only 27 were direct assaults against police.

    Meanwhile, in 2021 police shot and killed over 1,000 people.

    facetious on
    "I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde
    Real strong, facetious.

    Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
  • Options
    PinfeldorfPinfeldorf Yeah ZestRegistered User regular
    How many died to slipping on their own dick because it fell off? I reckon not enough.

  • Options
    LabelLabel Registered User regular
    Dear Democratic dipshits,

    Fascists are not going to vote for you, just because you gave them money. They're fascists, they're fundamentally opposed to democracy.

  • Options
    nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Label wrote: »
    Dear Democratic dipshits,

    Fascists are not going to vote for you, just because you gave them money. They're fascists, they're fundamentally opposed to democracy.

    I mean I could be misremembering but I'm pretty sure that particular democrat is a fascist herself.

    Quire.jpg
  • Options
    Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    Has anyone heard anything about this? It's looking like the boy was literally lynched

  • Options
    TefTef Registered User regular
    Label wrote: »
    Dear Democratic dipshits,

    Fascists are not going to vote for you, just because you gave them money. They're fascists, they're fundamentally opposed to democracy.

    Bold of you to assume that democracy is the highest priority of Dem party leadership!

    help a fellow forumer meet their mental health care needs because USA healthcare sucks!

    Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better

    bit.ly/2XQM1ke
  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular

    The article provides the context for you if you aren't familiar with the history of baseball, but Jackie Robinson was the first Black baseball player to break the color barrier and play in the (until-then) white-only Major Leagues.

  • Options
    honoverehonovere Registered User regular
    Big data leak about the treatment of Uighurs in China got released on several news sites today. Basically confirms what was already known. China is committing genocide.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/85qihtvw6e/the-faces-from-chinas-uyghur-detention-camps

  • Options
    RoyceSraphimRoyceSraphim Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »

    The article provides the context for you if you aren't familiar with the history of baseball, but Jackie Robinson was the first Black baseball player to break the color barrier and play in the (until-then) white-only Major Leagues.

    I knew that, I was questioning why it was even an insult in that context of baseball.

  • Options
    WeedLordVegetaWeedLordVegeta Registered User regular
    I mean it wouldn't be that much different than comparing a modern black singer to Sammy Davis right

    Regardless of accomplishment you're simply refusing to see anything but skin color

  • Options
    RoyceSraphimRoyceSraphim Registered User regular
    Nevermind, Tim Anderson is black. That's why its an insult. His picture isn't in the article.

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Nevermind, Tim Anderson is black. That's why its an insult. His picture isn't in the article.

    Anderson is in the second of three pictures included in the article, but you do have to click through manually to view beyond the first photo.

  • Options
    RoyceSraphimRoyceSraphim Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Nevermind, Tim Anderson is black. That's why its an insult. His picture isn't in the article.

    Anderson is in the second of three pictures included in the article, but you do have to click through manually to view beyond the first photo.

    Really?

    Huh.

    Half the pictures didnt load the first few times. Assuming I could see them through the ads

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Nevermind, Tim Anderson is black. That's why its an insult. His picture isn't in the article.

    Anderson is in the second of three pictures included in the article, but you do have to click through manually to view beyond the first photo.

    Really?

    Huh.

    Half the pictures didnt load the first few times. Assuming I could see them through the ads

    Yeah it isn't really on you - they should have either had it where all involved parties were in a single image, or at least provided the clarification in the text. It is implied, but this conversation is proof that there is ambiguity present that could have easily been prevented.

  • Options
    Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister It Gets Worse before it gets any better.Registered User regular
    stuff like that is really irritating because it would take all of two seconds to fix, unless getting licensing to a photo is some big hairy deal that i'm ignorant of the difficulties of.

  • Options
    RoyceSraphimRoyceSraphim Registered User regular
    Signal degradation as story gets filtered through various outlets

  • Options
    MadpoetMadpoet Registered User regular
    Donaldson, who is white, said he had used the “Jackie” reference in the past with Anderson, who had said he viewed himself as a potential modern-day Robinson in a 2019 interview with Sports Illustrated.
    I don't get the fuss. To me it reads like a kid saying "I'm going to be the next Tom Brady" and other players clowning on him by calling him "Tom". If JD had come up with it on his own, maybe there'd be something there, but he was just playing off the interview. The article suggests that it was in bad taste due to past interactions, but none of the examples suggested racism either. Is there more to it?

  • Options
    PoorochondriacPoorochondriac Ah, man Ah, jeezRegistered User regular
    Madpoet wrote: »
    Donaldson, who is white, said he had used the “Jackie” reference in the past with Anderson, who had said he viewed himself as a potential modern-day Robinson in a 2019 interview with Sports Illustrated.
    I don't get the fuss. To me it reads like a kid saying "I'm going to be the next Tom Brady" and other players clowning on him by calling him "Tom". If JD had come up with it on his own, maybe there'd be something there, but he was just playing off the interview. The article suggests that it was in bad taste due to past interactions, but none of the examples suggested racism either. Is there more to it?

    I don't even watch baseball but I did one google search and this was the first result:

    https://sports.yahoo.com/tim-anderson-said-he-warned-josh-donaldson-about-calling-him-jackie-in-2019-214015588.html

    The target said, "Don't do that," the aggressor did it anyway. The aggressor wanted to do something he knew would upset the person he was speaking to, and the way he chose to upset someone was to weaponize the name of a Black man.

    That sucks shit.

  • Options
    minor incidentminor incident expert in a dying field njRegistered User regular
    Since I know not everyone here is into baseball, let me let you in on a little secret:

    If a white professional baseball player says something that might possibly be taken as racist, they 110% meant it to be racist.

    Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
  • Options
    GnizmoGnizmo Registered User regular
    Madpoet wrote: »
    Donaldson, who is white, said he had used the “Jackie” reference in the past with Anderson, who had said he viewed himself as a potential modern-day Robinson in a 2019 interview with Sports Illustrated.
    I don't get the fuss. To me it reads like a kid saying "I'm going to be the next Tom Brady" and other players clowning on him by calling him "Tom". If JD had come up with it on his own, maybe there'd be something there, but he was just playing off the interview. The article suggests that it was in bad taste due to past interactions, but none of the examples suggested racism either. Is there more to it?

    I get this on a certain level. I honestly don't understand on an intuitive level why this would be offensive, bad, or even funny. It just seems kinda dumb. This is a common enough reaction for me with a lot of stuff that people call out as racist. What I have learned is that racists get clever by not being clever at all. They do some innocuous shit to only certain people based on race over and over. This ultimately leads to a situation where the person being harassed knows they are being targeted based on race, and white ass people like me just get confused.

    The short version is that when someone says something is racist, you just believe them. If the other person isn't trying to be an asshole they will apologize and try to figure out what went wrong. Any other reaction is almost certainly telling of the person's motivations.

  • Options
    V1mV1m Registered User regular
    I feel like a lot of people believe that it's pretty important for them to be assholes.

  • Options
    ElaroElaro Apologetic Registered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    I feel like a lot of people believe that it's pretty important for them to be assholes.

    As something of an ex-asshole, when I was acting like an asshole (mostly during my teen years), it did, in the moment, feel like I was providing an important social function that I act the way I did, something something inoculation against "real" assholes? Something something teaching a lesson about the limited power of human requests? I was basically role-playing as the Adversary without being asked or telling people that I was. I was fucking up big time and for a long while.

    So I understand the reasoning, and I also understand that it's completely bunk. Argument: people already have enough problems just from living in reality; other people adding their behavior to "the list of problems people have to deal with to live in reality" is not actually helping them solve/deal with the problems they already have.

    Yeah, it's basic, and you don't have to think very hard or very long in order to realize it, but Western institutions (capitalism, Christianity, advertising (commercial and political), parenting culture, etc.) doesn't exactly encourage or make it easy to do basic thinking about mundane matters or take the time to do it, is it?

    Children's rights are human rights.
  • Options
    ph blakeph blake Registered User regular
    Since I know not everyone here is into baseball, let me let you in on a little secret:

    If a white professional baseball player says something that might possibly be taken as racist, they 110% meant it to be racist.

    The other missing context for non baseball fans here: Josh Donaldson is a hugely unrepentant asshole/troll and has been known as such for his entire career.

    Like, there is literally 0 reason to believe he meant it in good faith.

    7h8wnycre6vs.png
  • Options
    MadpoetMadpoet Registered User regular
    Gnizmo wrote: »
    Madpoet wrote: »
    Donaldson, who is white, said he had used the “Jackie” reference in the past with Anderson, who had said he viewed himself as a potential modern-day Robinson in a 2019 interview with Sports Illustrated.
    I don't get the fuss. To me it reads like a kid saying "I'm going to be the next Tom Brady" and other players clowning on him by calling him "Tom". If JD had come up with it on his own, maybe there'd be something there, but he was just playing off the interview. The article suggests that it was in bad taste due to past interactions, but none of the examples suggested racism either. Is there more to it?

    I get this on a certain level. I honestly don't understand on an intuitive level why this would be offensive, bad, or even funny. It just seems kinda dumb. This is a common enough reaction for me with a lot of stuff that people call out as racist. What I have learned is that racists get clever by not being clever at all. They do some innocuous shit to only certain people based on race over and over. This ultimately leads to a situation where the person being harassed knows they are being targeted based on race, and white ass people like me just get confused.

    The short version is that when someone says something is racist, you just believe them. If the other person isn't trying to be an asshole they will apologize and try to figure out what went wrong. Any other reaction is almost certainly telling of the person's motivations.
    Nah? Context is everything - there's a big difference between Candace Owens telling me Bernie Sanders is racist and Bernie Sanders telling me Candace Owens is. If someone says something is racist, you listen, examine, and try to understand. The taunt in question doesn't make a lick of sense as a racist comment, and makes a ton of sense in the context of poking fun at the interview. This guy may have a history of being an asshole, but does he have a history of being a racist asshole? I genuinely don't know.

  • Options
    GR_ZombieGR_Zombie Krillin It Registered User regular
    Nobody should ever give white guys the benefit of the doubt. I say this as a white guy.

    04xkcuvaav19.png
  • Options
    MadpoetMadpoet Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    GR_Zombie wrote: »
    Nobody should ever give white guys the benefit of the doubt. I say this as a white guy.
    White guys grow up in a culture that trains them to think a certain way, and it's fucking hard to overcome it. "Oh shit, I didn't realize" should absolutely give the benefit of the doubt - once. I'm old enough to have seen Song of the South on the big screen, I have a lot of baggage to overcome, and I'm not going to hold it against someone that doesn't want to interact with me after I fuck up. But as an ally, I feel it's my job to give others the same chances to improve that I was.

    Madpoet on
  • Options
    RingoRingo He/Him a distinct lack of substanceRegistered User regular
    edited May 2022
    This isn't an "I didn't realize" situation. This is a situation where Person A taunts, Person B says stop, Person A continues to taunt at mutliple different events, so much so that those most intimately familiar with the situation between Person A and Person B (their teammates) collectively decide that a bench clearing brawl between Team A and Team B is the necessary next step.

    Like, there's very little ambiguity here if you just look at the events. You don't need to extend anyone the benefit of the doubt from an uninformed position if all of the informed positions say "It's racism, bruh". And that's not just the posters here, that's the MLB players on the field saying it

    Ringo on
    Sterica wrote: »
    I know my last visit to my grandpa on his deathbed was to find out how the whole Nazi werewolf thing turned out.
    Edcrab's Exigency RPG
This discussion has been closed.