mr.fizwidget

argggggggg

I have no goal in this! I took a stand for something I know is right, nothing more. And I also called you out for what you said about me and all the searching, cause well, you deserved it. I called a moron because what you said about me was derogatory and false. No worries though.

Despite what you may think, I'm not walking away from this thinking bad thoughts about any of you guys. I think some people just need to take a step outside the box and analyze the situation from more than one angle.

""This is crazy. If I would have been there Knorr would have been pinned on the ground and completely immobilized in less than a ****ing second."---Ace

you also have multiple posts in the "ever gotten in a fight" thread...

look man, people have opinions. you probably have an opinion of me. your opinion likely changed after you read what i vm'ed to pp. just like mine changed when you told me to kiss your *** and called me a moron.

i am sorry i did not pm my opinions on everyone to pp...you better believe next time i will"

Dude. An hour and a half of searching through my posts and that's all you can come up with? One example where I stated that I would have PREVENTED a fight, and one where the thread was completely based on telling stories about fights. Admit it, you've got me figured wrong.

I know that people have opinions. My opinion didn't really change of you considering I don't judge people off small instances like that over swf. I will, however, point out when someone is publicly **** talking me because I stood up for something that is right. Also, good stuff on deciding to talk **** about me over pm instead of vm, looks like you've got everything figured out.

Bored yet? :<

None of my business? Excuse me for interrupting your little gossip with PP that consisted of unnecessary and unwarranted **** talking on me and my brother. Sounds like you're the one that needs to mind his business buddy. Dorsey said that if he was black he'd probably end up beating someone's *** if it came down to it (if the remarks were malicious and continuous). No one really said anything for Bl@ckChris and we both wanted him to know that we supported what he was saying, because we know he's right and deserves the same respect as everyone else.

Oh, and PLEASE, PLEASE show me where I get upset and mention fighting. Moron.

Good luck with everything man.

You could just keep that pleasure to yourself then lol.

Anyway, definitely good times for gossip today, regardless of view on any of this.

I gave you fair warning lol.

PMs next time?

"i think cam is funny, partly because he is over the top/unexpected...although i can see where he could be seen as offensive...

which is the point that ace and dorsey were trying to make...except they are waaaaaaaaay too hot headed and take everything personally...which is nothing new...i also think it is funny how everything involves fist fights with them..."

Kiss my *** Fiz. I don't take stuff too personally, I just stick up for what I know is right, and I wish more people had the balls to do the same. You think everything involves fist fights when it comes to me and Dorsey? You're an idiot. It was painstakingly obvious that quite a few people in NC don't know what empathy is or don't care about showing respect to their peers. The fact that most people that make stupid racist remarks eventually end up getting in a physical altercation is just another reason (as if you need another) not to say stupid **** like that. Do you think I go around punching anyone I hear saying the N word? PLEASE. This is something that Dorsey and I have observed for some time now and I'm actually glad it came to this, as I feel it will ease up a bit now.

Staying out of it isn't always the same as taking the high road. A lot of times it's just the easiest way out.

Btw, thanks for generalizing me and Dorsey when you know NOTHING about us, or the matter at hand.

I still have to deal with the consequences of talking about others who snoop though.

Agreed on Cam for sure. Though I agree with him and Yay.

Karn is pretty good at that usually.

Don Hudson is indeed a man's name.

I didn't want the thread closed because every point had been discussed and things were getting repetitive lol.

Yes.

Yes.....and probably.

Sometimes badly. =p

Oh well it's all good. No one is seriously upset over this besides a few outside people(not Mike G) and maybe Ace/Dorsey.

We're all terribly predictable and I love it.

Well, let me know in some form(here or PM or otherwise).

You know VMs aren't very private these days. =p

Tell me what you think of the brocator thread when you finish(you can make it private if you want).

Lol, that's pretty sweet, thanks

Hope you get your grade.

Haha, no problem.

If you need a free paragraph for your paper, Google search a priori/a posteriori/synthetic/analytic judgments and just spend a paragraph explaining what they are. It's a really easy tie in to Kant.

I'm pretty much done rambling. Too much thinking, lol. I can keep going if you need more though, though I'm not really sure how much I helped so far.

Another thing, moral actions are unrelated to laws or religion. The categorical imperative must be universalizable unconditionally (this is what makes them "categorical").

To act because of a law or because of a God would add a condition, and thus make the imperative "hypothetical" versus "categorical."

His intention was to make clear that our reason determines which maxims are moral and which are not. Not the type of reason that we use to understand the world around us (a posteriori), but rather, a priori reasoning, such as the implicit knowledge of a triangle having 3 sides and angles. We cannot explain why, nor can experience (other than the initial learning of the fact) teach us this. Our moral maxims work the same way.

According to Kant, we should all "Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."

An example of a maxim would be "I will wear a jacket because it is cold outside." It is not the action of putting on the jacket, it is the reaction to fulfill some purpose.

Thus, to act morally, our maxims must be "universalizable." This is an abstract concept, but what Kant means by it is that if you were to apply that maxim across the world to every person, no contradictions in your will to exist in the world of the universalized maxim would arise. This idea of contradictions is simple with basic maxims such as the example I have provided, but it gets far less so when dealing with common moral concepts.

For instance, according to the idea of the categorical imperative, the maxim "Lying gets me what I want" would be immoral, because if one were to extend that maxim universally, a contradiction would arise. You would not desire to exist in a world where you were universally lied to for personal gain.

This sounds an awful lot like the golden rule inherently, but do not confuse them. Moral actions, according to Kant, treat other humans as an end, not as a means. For example, it is immoral to steal from someone because you are using them as a means for which you can procure wealth, however, it is moral to purchase something form someone because you are using them as an end.

Ok, that's kind of a murky topic lol. I guess the most commonly known and "simplest" to explain portion of his moral philosophy is the idea of the categorical imperative. I'm kind of assuming you don't have any basis on this subject so I'll try (really hard) to make it easy to understand.

That's alright. What specifically do you need to know? I don't much history about the guy, but I'm pretty versed about his metaphysics/moral philosophy.

Do you have AIM?

Haha true.

I feel for you man. I got sick during some of my exams earlier and that sucked. Can't imagine if that was right now.

That's what my swine was like.

Hang in there bro.

Depends on the strain of it.

If you got bad swine flu like I did, then it's around a week. Traditional flu is around half of that I'd guess.

He just wanted to MM. When I told him I was going Falcon he got pretty happy about it.

Heeeeeck yeah.

Also, I actually taught myself everything about Falcon except for that Uair off the edge trick(lozr does it).

NC's Falcons raaaaape though.

Why does my training routine make me crazy?

It works. =p

says what bbq said lol
was in system, perhaps you have an account by now. enjoy~ :D

no, thank you

ok, that email worked. You should get an email within the next 24 hours or so.

It says that email address is "already in system". Did you try joining lockerz before? Do you have an alternate email address I can use instead?

sure, just PM me your email address.

Hmmm, I'm not sure. Malk and Knorr might be coming so I'll probably team with one of them.

Jon? is ranked 6th on the brawl pr's.

She can't move half as freely as Falcon and he gets beat by Falco.

Peach can PS your laser and grab you. 40+%. Thanks Lazer.

I'm just telling you, 40% from one setup means Falco is gonna be offstage soon. Peach is efficient at edgegaurding spacies. It is deemed as "his hardest matchup" by a lot of people.

PP's advice is better then mine but I'll tell you personally what I think about it so far.

Lasers are cool and all, but Peach can just Up+Throw Dsmash at 0 for like 40. How manly lasers is 40%? A **** load, she just really racks it on and the slighest slip up is lol down smash.

I'm not sure....I haven't played a Peach that is **** vs Falco yet.

If Peach would float over Falco's laser like an intelligent person would then the matchup would be even at least. Probably slightly in Peach's favor.

There's a lot I could say about it but that's the very rough idea.

what do you think of peach vs falco?

I think so.

I'll get back to you on it.....