Trident

Neglify said:

Did I say 15? Stupid dyslexia. 51.

 Umm wow I got old fast lol!

Leonardo said:

... so many go to bed hungry in this nation, yet cat food is full of tuna! I can't help but think each time I go to the zoo and see those porpoises, crammed into those tiny tanks, what a waste that is. Butcher half of them now! That's hundreds of pounds of dolphin meat that can be fed to our cats, freeing up that tuna for our nation's hungry.
[...]

... so many are cold, shivering in the night, so I say, butcher those cats, skin them! Use their fur to keep hundreds warm!

 Oh, that's good. That's really quite good!

DuracellEnergizer said:

If he's fifteen, he has a good grasp on spelling, punctuation, and grammer for someone of his generation.

 Well thanks, I guess! lol!

Neglify said:

Question 5: How old is Trident? I'm thinking like 15.

 :-(

DuracellEnergizer said:

Trident said:

One thing about these resorts though: no kids can be born there so the men will have to be 'fixed.'

Actually the same thing should be done with long-term dangerous offenders in prison just to keep their conjugal visits unproductive. Having children under such circumstances can only lead to problems.

This is a slippery slide just waiting to be slid upon.

 Is it kinda like the slope we slid down when we released everyone from sanitoriums (yay!) only to let them live under bridges?

Danfun128 said:

I still think such resorts are, as an idea, stupid at best and extremely dangerous at worst.

 Why? I can think of a bunch of reasons, but I'm wondering if they are the same.

Right now I think it's stupid that we let people live off of garbage while we pretend they aren't really there.

TV's Frink said:

doubleofive said:

Trident said:

Oh, there were two of them? No wonder one was banned!

One is just some kid, the original was actually Ric Olie.

And furthermore, the actual Ric Olie, the one who was banned, was here first.  So the banning of one had nothing to do with the other.

More here:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-Ric-Olie-Observation-Thread/post/377439/#TopicPost377439 (make sure you read to the part where Ric is allowed to stay)

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Update-on-recent-troll-and-sock-puppet-activity/topic/16173/

 That appears to be quite a saga.

I'm still a bit confused about it, but I'm sure once I read it all will be clear! (I just don't have much time today).

doubleofive said:

Trident said:

Oh, there were two of them? No wonder one was banned!

One is just some kid, the original was actually Ric Olie.

 You mean it was actually the guy who played Ric in the movie?

Never mind I understand better after reading Frink's post.

Oh, there were two of them? No wonder one was banned!

One thing about these resorts though: no kids can be born there so the men will have to be 'fixed.'

Actually the same thing should be done with long-term dangerous offenders in prison just to keep their conjugal visits unproductive. Having children under such circumstances can only lead to problems.

Yes we do. If we have enough money to put millions of people in jail and buy a billion billion worth of weapons we've got the money.

But to be practical, why not teach them to help each other in a mini economy? Have some of them learn to bake bread, have others raise chickens, and others mend fences. Try to make it as self-sustaining as possible. Anything to keep them from getting bored and then wanting their fix.

Those who don't participate (according to their abilities) don't get some perk or other, but instead get assigned to one of their buddies for safe keeping until they are able to care for themselves.

TV's Frink said:

Before I say anything, I'll mention that I am aware of how much rope I am given outside of off-topic, and truly I am appreciative of it.

With that said, I had forgotten about Moth3r's post, and I assumed that Negative 1 was given latitude due to his contributions to the community.  But seeing Moth3r's post again, and realizing Negative 1 is not suppose to be posting using the team account, it's only fair to point out there have been several instances of the real Negative 1 posting with the team account in the past few months.  I don't think I could find them, but I definitely remember the team account posting with his unique style.  And this despite the laughable assertion by the team account (on multiple occasions) that Negative 1 is no longer active or part of the team.

And having said that, I think it's quite possible that he's posting with the team account lately, without using his unique style.  The team account has been posting a lot lately outside of their project threads (see the 4k thread, for just one example), with a lot of negativity, and a lot of the "we" bullshit that we all know actually means "I."

The allowed use of a team account is a bad idea IMO because how many people are using it?  Who is posting what?  When the team account says "we know that 4k is a pointless medium," who is really saying that?

I don't have any solutions here, as it's impossible to police this, and I do recognize the contributions the team is making to the community.  But it certainly is annoying and I certainly will continue to speak my mind about it.

JEDIT: One more thing, I will never, ever understand the Ric Olie banning.  But I'm cool with Cookie Monster being banned.  He was kind of a loser.

 We don't understand why this is a problem and we still see Ric Olie posting so we don't get it.

I thought you had to get permission in the New Thread Thread Thread

4th idea:

Once a certain gang has been shown to be violent, membership to that gang should be illegal. A gang is like a corporation. If a corporation was found to be repeatedly sponsoring terrorists I'm pretty sure that company would get shut down and all of its directors jailed.

The same thing should happen to the Hells Angels and any other visibly marked gang with gang members. All the members should equally be held liable for the worst crimes their gang has committed just like all directors would be held responsible for having their company break the law.

Gang members in prison should then be separated and socialized rather than locked up with other criminals because it is a lack of a familial structure that usually leads them to want to join a gang to begin with. The psycopaths should be separated from the others as best as possible, but the regular ones should be given a chance to resocialize.

Have them work raising animals or something. Maybe they could incorporate animal rescue shelters into their prisons or something to give them a chance to learn how to care for things. Or maybe that won't work. Any ideas?

Danfun128 said:

Trident said:

Should the mentally ill ... be aloud to wander around major cities? Why don't we round all these types up and put them in a resort or something?

I'd like you to define "mentally ill". Do you include treatable conditions, like Aspergers or Bipolar disorder? Do individuals like those who are trying their best to live normals lives deserve to be arrested. Yes you would be putting them in a golden cage, but it would still be a cage nonetheless.

Also, why should you limit ourselves to taking just the mentally ill and the homeless out of society? [sarcasm]Why not the communists, and the jews, and any other undesirables you can think of? In fact, why is civil rights a thing? Our country should be filled with only sane white people. Everything else can live in comfort while not really doing anything[/sarcasm]

Note: I am not a bigot (at least, I am not trying to be). I have nothing against communists or jews or other races or anybody else. I am just trying to make a point of where Trident's line of thinking might lead to.

 The idea is that right now we are not doing anything for people who live in cardboard boxes and eat out of the garbage through no fault of their own. We used to lock these people away in sanitariums and that was pretty awful so I say why not scoop them up and put them on a perpetual holiday from their troubles. I group the homeless in with mentally ill in the sense that many of the homeless people are really quite mentally ill. I'm not envisioning a door to door search for people who are already coping. I'm just thinking of those poor bastards who are living in alleys.

TV's Frink said:

Because money.  We don't have enough to provide food and shelter, and you want to build resorts in the wilderness.

Also because freedom.  Being poor shouldn't be a crime.

 Because alchoholism and addictions. Is it really that much more compassionate to leave these people to self-destruct on the streets in the cold than to put them in a resort where they can't easily get the things that are ruining them?

Take them away from all the things that tempt them into these habits and get them where professionals can keep an eye on them. Set the place up with rehab facilities and workshops that help them learn or relearn trades. Get them a chance to overcome their problems.

And yes, it will cost a lot of money, but so what?

OK, 3rd question:

Should the mentally ill and/or homeless people be aloud to wander around major cities? Why don't we round all these types up and put them in a resort or something?

I don't think we need to be mean to them or lock them in prison, but a resort located in the middle of nowhere that would have all of their needs met, but not have access to alcohol or drugs. If they wandered away from it they would have to walk for days to get back to civilization, at which point they would be picked up and put back there.

Make the cities clean and help these guys at the same time.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Possessed said:

How about large amounts of cocaine?  Does that count as well?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP7G1PUbbKM

Does that answer your question?

 I prefer them in Fleetwood Mac

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Tobar said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Interstellar.

Okay I am a huge Nolan fan and I defended both The Dark Knight Rises and Man of Steel.  I also believe Person of Interest is one of the best TV shows ever made, so please remember that.

 Not much of a fan if you're only seeing it now. You didn't get the full experience unless you caught either a 35mm showing or the 70mm IMAX film performance.

Seeing this film on a full sized IMAX screen in 70mm was breathtaking.

 Sorry but at the time due to medical bills and my dad being in and out of work due to the medical issues I didn't have the money to see this in theaters, my family was some times going days between eating just so we didn't end up on the streets.  When I can get the movie a few months later out of the library for free I can't really justify spending $13 to see a movie once, no matter how big a fan I am of the director.  Sorry.

Now I know there have been long movies in the past and I am not in favor of studios getting in the way, it's just it seems like all the movies I see lately run at least two and a half hours and a lot of it feels like padding to me.  I think that may be one reason I am watching more TV these days, say what you will about the 42 minute run time of most shows but it does keep the plots focused and the action scenes don't tend to drag.  I think one problem these days is that a lot of actions scenes just go on and on to the point where I get board,

That could be serious. You might want to change position more often.

it seems like in the past action scenes were faster paced and got to the point faster.

I know I may be alone in this and that given some of the movies I am a fan if this may seem like a strange stance but I just think we need more 90 minute movies these days.  I feel like if the films just got to the point and didn't leave me looking at my watch and getting too tired to finish them in one sitting then I wouldn't notice half the plot holes I do and be tempted to nitpick them.

Maybe this movie was better in theaters but I feel that with just one more rewrite or two and some editing it could have been a great movie at home as well as at theaters and I wish the last act didn't take that nosedive into being complete sap.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Trident said:

I'm actually bitching about having to go back to work tomorrow.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KThlYHfIVa8 

 Um, thanks?

I prefer e and alcohol myself. Helps me sleep lol!

My car just broke down and I need to get to work tomorrow.

I'm actually bitching about having to go back to work tomorrow.

I have never gotten a message in my little bell.

TV's Frink said:

Trident said:

DrCrowTStarwars said:

Oh and 4.0 out of 10 on my scale means that it is just below average.

To give you some idea of what that means I consider Search for Spoke

Is that a show about missing parts on a bicycle?

 I give this post a 6.0 out of 10, meaning it's just above average.

 But I tried so hard!

Haha 2 points!