• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Smash UK Discussion Thread - Check first post for tournaments, facebook info and videos!

L-J

L-J

Smash Ace
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
771
Location
Cambridge/Bristol, UK
In all seriousness Tamoo and I may well be going double puff in the future depending on matchups -for realz. And yeah Hugo can rest sometimes; like decent rests - for realz.
 
j3ly

j3ly

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
2,001
Location
London
i'd still bet money my puff can beat Cambridge's mains and their puffs in dittos :s


only chars i play these days are puff and mewtwo - smash is getting booooooring but these 2 chars are still very fun :D
 
Professor Pro

Professor Pro

Smash Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
10,261
Location
England, South London
Well I definitely didn't see you were making music otherwise I would have def remembered that lol.

I bet you're trying out making DubStep....

I found out the other day that DubStep was actually originated in Croydon which is where I live lol :bee:

And also I wrote my post very quickly, didn't really care what it said as it's only you plus you're gonna be dead soon :)

All it was missing was 'Not gonna get anywhere'
 
Retroking2000

Retroking2000

Smash Master
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
3,577
Location
London , Silver Street
sometimes it gets boring when you dont really feel like you have improved as much as you should have.
switching does add some fun back into the game though but after a while it starts to feel the same again
and just playing makes it all competitive again lol

so taking a break is the best thing , you might get worse but hey at least you will gained some interest again later xD

i used to make beats using acid studio its mad gay learning music theory lol
 
j3ly

j3ly

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
2,001
Location
London
dubstep originates from reggae scar, which the west copied from black people back in the 1950's lol

not really making music atm.. trying to get my head around all the programmes. i could make dubstep but it would sound like **** until i learn more shiz

edit - what edwin said minus the improvement thing, cos i just learned how to cover every option near the edge of the stage but simply cba to refine it. hopefully get some motivation back
 
Professor Pro

Professor Pro

Smash Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
10,261
Location
England, South London
j3ly said:
hope you die in a house fire caused by cigarettes
Click to expand...
No-one in my house smokes because we're smart and healthy enough not to.

I'm not gonna hope you die since it's inevitable it will happen in the next two years.
Time to make a 'Bucket List' imo. :oneeye:


Retroking2000 said:
prof why dont you ever come online on your xbox ?
Click to expand...
Because I don't have XBOX Live and also because I don't really have a game to play online a lot lol....well I do have Black Ops and I prolly would play it if I had XBOX Live but i'm not too hyped about playing it any time soon, will at some point though.
 
Heartstring

Heartstring

Smash Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Messages
11,129
Location
England
VA said:
where does being smart come into that? intelligence is not related to smoking.
Click to expand...
smart enough to not start smoking and therefore end up spending all your earning on ***s.
probably means 'strong enough willpower' instead of smart
 
VA

VA

Smash Hero
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
5,003
Location
Brighton, UK
Golden-psyco said:
smart enough to not start smoking and therefore end up spending all your earning on ***s.
probably means 'strong enough willpower' instead of smart
Click to expand...
I'm assuming you don't understand what it takes to start smoking or be a smoker or anything to do with the process. it has nothing to do with being smart. there are hundreds of crazy intelligent people that smoke.

As Oscar Wilde put it "A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want?".

Therefore I find it questionable to call it smart to resist a pleasurable activity purely on the grounds that it is bad for you.

You could frame it as a trade off maybe?
 
Professor Pro

Professor Pro

Smash Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
10,261
Location
England, South London
Golden-psyco said:
smart enough to not start smoking and therefore end up spending all your earning on ***s.
probably means 'strong enough willpower' instead of smart
Click to expand...
This is what I basically meant, and smart as in 'they know it's damaging so they're not going to do it' not 'people who smoke obviously have a inferior intellect to those who don't smoke'

rustediron said:
Yeah, but you definitely have to admit that it looks bare cool.
Click to expand...
In all honesty it doesn't lol.
Well that's to me anyway, i've seen a good looking girl before and i've got put off from them smoking...
 
Retroking2000

Retroking2000

Smash Master
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
3,577
Location
London , Silver Street
you never hear people saying i smoke because i choose to do it

mostly its just peer pressure

like how king ndj started smoking cause of his bro

but honestly why would someone want to smoke it ages you like a ***** lol
 
rustediron

rustediron

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
1,347
Location
London, UK
VA said:
As Oscar Wilde put it, "A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want?"
Click to expand...
LOL, that's actually very clever, <3 Oscar Wilde.

Also, being critical of someone's intelligence because you disagree with their value judgements is just plain ignorance. People assign values to pleasures not through some concious choice, but as a result of simple intuition on a subconcious level. Intelligence only comes into it, then, when they start making choices about what actions to do to try and maximise their overall pleasure based on these preferences.

Given that you're going to have to assume a basic level of rationality for people (or else you have no reason to bother trying to understand them - principle of charity), you should be naturally inclined to believe that the probability that someone is acting in accordance with their value judgements and preferences (i.e. intelligently) is much higher than the probability that someone is actuing against their value judgements and preferences (i.e. irrationally).

Furthermore, seeing as you have no method of knowing exactly what values people assign to various pleasures, there's no way for you to definitively judge someone's intelligence based on the choices they make anyway.

The only thing you could judge, is the values to the pleasures that people are assigning (though as there is no concious choice involved here, this isn't a matter of intelligence). Even then, however, a notion of 'good' assignment of values and a 'bad' assignment of values would most reasonably be reliant on maximising one's pleasure. In such a case, the ideal would be to draw incomparable amounts of pleasure from easily accomplishable, renewable tasks; conversely, it would be unideal if you drew incomparable amounts of pleasure from difficult, non-renewable tasks.

Here then, is Oscar Wilde's point; whilst smoking may be detrimental to health and finances, something people tend to assign negative pleasure values, smoking is, at least, renewable and easily accomplished. One can smoke and smoke, and still be satisfied from each one; this is true of markedly few pleasures. If you get a lot of pleasure out of smoking then, one could be a very, very happy person :)

tl;dr: I'm just being a ****head again ignore me lol

Edit: I don't smoke btw, I like my lungs lololololol
 
rustediron

rustediron

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
1,347
Location
London, UK
There's no good reason to attribute rights to animals, or to bother maximising their utility beyond the effect of their utility upon yours.
 
j3ly

j3ly

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
2,001
Location
London
hugo could u throw down a tl;dr for the smokers please

- probably should have checked before i posted
 
Bullet Bill

Bullet Bill

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 9, 2007
Messages
3,734
Location
UK - Southampton
rustediron said:
LOL, that's actually very clever, <3 Oscar Wilde.

Also, being critical of someone's intelligence because you disagree with their value judgements is just plain ignorance. People assign values to pleasures not through some concious choice, but as a result of simple intuition on a subconcious level. Intelligence only comes into it, then, when they start making choices about what actions to do to try and maximise their overall pleasure based on these preferences.

Given that you're going to have to assume a basic level of rationality for people (or else you have no reason to bother trying to understand them - principle of charity), you should be naturally inclined to believe that the probability that someone is acting in accordance with their value judgements and preferences (i.e. intelligently) is much higher than the probability that someone is actuing against their value judgements and preferences (i.e. irrationally).

Furthermore, seeing as you have no method of knowing exactly what values people assign to various pleasures, there's no way for you to definitively judge someone's intelligence based on the choices they make anyway.

The only thing you could judge, is the values to the pleasures that people are assigning (though as there is no concious choice involved here, this isn't a matter of intelligence). Even then, however, a notion of 'good' assignment of values and a 'bad' assignment of values would most reasonably be reliant on maximising one's pleasure. In such a case, the ideal would be to draw incomparable amounts of pleasure from easily accomplishable, renewable tasks; conversely, it would be unideal if you drew incomparable amounts of pleasure from difficult, non-renewable tasks.

Here then, is Oscar Wilde's point; whilst smoking may be detrimental to health and finances, something people tend to assign negative pleasure values, smoking is, at least, renewable and easily accomplished. One can smoke and smoke, and still be satisfied from each one; this is true of markedly few pleasures. If you get a lot of pleasure out of smoking then, one could be a very, very happy person :)

tl;dr: I'm just being a ****head again ignore me lol

Edit: I don't smoke btw, I like my lungs lololololol
Click to expand...

pointless Hugo post no 915


btw this is enough guys. This is smashboards not smokeboards
 
Professor Pro

Professor Pro

Smash Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
10,261
Location
England, South London
rustediron said:
LOL, that's actually very clever, <3 Oscar Wilde.

Also, being critical of someone's intelligence because you disagree with their value judgements is just plain ignorance. People assign values to pleasures not through some concious choice, but as a result of simple intuition on a subconcious level. Intelligence only comes into it, then, when they start making choices about what actions to do to try and maximise their overall pleasure based on these preferences.

Given that you're going to have to assume a basic level of rationality for people (or else you have no reason to bother trying to understand them - principle of charity), you should be naturally inclined to believe that the probability that someone is acting in accordance with their value judgements and preferences (i.e. intelligently) is much higher than the probability that someone is actuing against their value judgements and preferences (i.e. irrationally).

Furthermore, seeing as you have no method of knowing exactly what values people assign to various pleasures, there's no way for you to definitively judge someone's intelligence based on the choices they make anyway.

The only thing you could judge, is the values to the pleasures that people are assigning (though as there is no concious choice involved here, this isn't a matter of intelligence). Even then, however, a notion of 'good' assignment of values and a 'bad' assignment of values would most reasonably be reliant on maximising one's pleasure. In such a case, the ideal would be to draw incomparable amounts of pleasure from easily accomplishable, renewable tasks; conversely, it would be unideal if you drew incomparable amounts of pleasure from difficult, non-renewable tasks.

Here then, is Oscar Wilde's point; whilst smoking may be detrimental to health and finances, something people tend to assign negative pleasure values, smoking is, at least, renewable and easily accomplished. One can smoke and smoke, and still be satisfied from each one; this is true of markedly few pleasures. If you get a lot of pleasure out of smoking then, one could be a very, very happy person :)

tl;dr: I'm just being a ****head again ignore me lol

Edit: I don't smoke btw, I like my lungs lololololol
Click to expand...
LOL This is a completely empty and pointless post as no-ones view was 'If you smoke you lack intellegence' but I hope you had a fun time writing it.
 
rustediron

rustediron

Smash Lord
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
1,347
Location
London, UK
Professor Pro said:
LOL This is a completely empty and pointless post as no-ones view was 'If you smoke you lack intellegence' but I hope you had a fun time writing it.
Click to expand...
Well G-P's argument was essentially 'making the decision to smoke is not an intelligent decision', which I wanted to point out was an extremely ignorant viewpoint.

gm jack said:
So meat inspection is of no value at all? (protip - it has to be done by vets)
Click to expand...
...what?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom