Off-Topic

[Blzer]

re: Off-Topic

He's 28. My age is the 3rd prime following his age.

Ehem, I should have mentioned when I joined as another individual not named Blzer. And I don't know if I have it down to an exact month or anything like that, but I turn 30 in just four quick weeks.

[kehlis]

re: Off-Topic

He's 28.

Detective kehlis hasn't done much in awhile and seemed to think this didn't sound right so I did some digging and you forgot to do two things:

Fact check the author and forgot to account for our human nature to round up our age.

While blzer joined in May of 2004 his birthday is in June (of 88 according to his homepage) so that means he was in fact 14 when he joined which is the calculation he used and the logic you based it on.

But in actuality, he is currently 29 and about to turn 30 next month.


Happy upcoming 30th Bday Blzer! It's time to start celebrating the anniversary of your 30th birthday rather than age itself like I did!

I'm double the age I was when I joined.

About half the maturity.

Ha, I very much disagree. You've matured quite a bit. Muffin McFluffin was not a good look.

[Blzer]

re: Off-Topic

Thanks! Every birthday I get I always try and convince myself: "You're still young, damn it! Prove it to the world!" Last year I was trying to break a 5:00 minute mile again. Got down to about 5:15 before my knee started messing up. Ugh, age. I'll be running again this summer though to try it all over again.

And yeah, the "double" was more of just a saying anyway. Partly to throw in the next joke. But you're right, I read some of my old MuffinMcFluffin posts once and damn! I was not a really good Internet kid. What's funny is that I don't think the actual person at the computer has really changed one bit since then. Just found out how to compose myself the right way while actually using it. Give me another fifteen more years to actually really figure it out, though. Someone else will out-Blze me for sure.

[WaitTilNextYear]

re: Off-Topic

He's 28. My age is the 3rd prime following his age.

Oh, to be 33 again...

EDIT: I think I misinterpreted. You appear to be 37...like Dennis from the Holy Grail. I was originally thinking you were adding the 3rd prime number (which would be 5) to 28, but going 29, 31, and 37 makes more sense after re-reading. That's why I'm not a math person.

[Speedy]

re: Off-Topic

I came here under almost exactly the same circumstances. Except I did have internet and used my Sharkport/Xport to transfer DL'd rosters to my memory cards. I came here looking for rosters after DT sold his site to a guy who was chargning for rosters.

That's hilarious we both were in the same boat. I remember seeing like a $5 or $15 fee and I was like "Nope!" and started looking elsewhere.

[WaitTilNextYear]

re: Off-Topic

Anyone else mesmerized by this lava cam on CNN?

[WaitTilNextYear]

re: Off-Topic

I love the way this article is presented.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/25/us/in...her/index.html

One way, I think, to help curb the ridiculous frequency of these school shootings is to make it so the good guy(s) get famous after the incident and not the bad guy. Usually after a shooting, the perpetrator has his (and it's always a guy to be honest so I can use this pronoun literally) image, name, and the details of his pathetic existence plastered all over TV/internet etc. Make the shooter a mere footnote in the incident and focus the coverage on the innocents striving to recover and/or heroes like this one.

Simply changing the slant of the news coverage could be a helpful deterrent toward acting out in this pathetic way by deeply troubled individuals.

[Jr.]

re: Off-Topic

I love the way this article is presented.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/25/us/in...her/index.html

One way, I think, to help curb the ridiculous frequency of these school shootings is to make it so the good guy(s) get famous after the incident and not the bad guy. Usually after a shooting, the perpetrator has his (and it's always a guy to be honest so I can use this pronoun literally) image, name, and the details of his pathetic existence plastered all over TV/internet etc. Make the shooter a mere footnote in the incident and focus the coverage on the innocents striving to recover and/or heroes like this one.

Simply changing the slant of the news coverage could be a helpful deterrent toward acting out in this pathetic way by deeply troubled individuals.

Not quite

https://timeline.com/school-shooter-brenda-spencer-bf98e8bf106

To your point, though, I have noticed more and more coverage of the victims and those that attempt to stop these things from happening lately. We'll see if it makes a difference. I personally don't think it will because I don't think "fame" is a primary motivator in many of these occurrences of late.

[WaitTilNextYear]

re: Off-Topic

Not quite

https://timeline.com/school-shooter-brenda-spencer-bf98e8bf106

To your point, though, I have noticed more and more coverage of the victims and those that attempt to stop these things from happening lately. We'll see if it makes a difference. I personally don't think it will because I don't think "fame" is a primary motivator in many of these occurrences of late.

LOL, going back to 1979 to disprove my point. I'd like to see some stats, but I bet it's >99% male shooters. Anyhow, that's not the main point.

I'd have to disagree that fame isn't a motivator. I think--mostly me speculating here--they get the idea from seeing others do it. They see the attention it gets, crave it, and I believe that's an enormous motivating factor. To make some sort of demented statement and to have a demented 15 minutes of fame.

If it's not about fame, why make such a spectacle in a public place? On some level, I think a school shooting is inherently about some very ill person trying to make a name for himself (or herself).


EDIT: From your article: Spencer told classmates she was about “to do something big to get on TV.”

[l3ulvl]

re: Off-Topic

I think revenge could be just as motivating as notoriety

[Jr.]

re: Off-Topic

LOL, going back to 1979 to disprove my point. I'd like to see some stats, but I bet it's >99% male shooters. Anyhow, that's not the main point.

I'd have to disagree that fame isn't a motivator. I think--mostly me speculating here--they get the idea from seeing others do it. They see the attention it gets, crave it, and I believe that's an enormous motivating factor. To make some sort of demented statement and to have a demented 15 minutes of fame.

If it's not about fame, why make such a spectacle in a public place? On some level, I think a school shooting is inherently about some very ill person trying to make a name for himself (or herself).


EDIT: From your article: Spencer told classmates she was about “to do something big to get on TV.”

Notice I said occurrences of late. I'm sure there are multitudes of reasons that people decide to try to kill large numbers of people, many of which may not even make sense to the perpetrator upon further reflection.

I won't pretend like I know for sure.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Operation Sports mobile app

[countryboy]

re: Off-Topic

If people think fame is the primary reason for these shootings then we are never going to stop them. (Not that we ever truly will)

And no I don’t think guns are the issue either.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Blzer]

re: Off-Topic

I personally do believe that both media and social media are the one-two influential punch on shootings today. It has grown exponentially. That wouldn't have happened naturally.

Let me put it this way: if we lived in a noncommunicable world where other places didn't learn about other shootings (including Columbine), you wouldn't see the number of them that we see today.

[kehlis]

re: Off-Topic

I personally do believe that both media and social media are the one-two influential punch on shootings today. It has grown exponentially. That wouldn't have happened naturally.

Let me put it this way: if we lived in a noncommunicable world where other places didn't learn about other shootings (including Columbine), you wouldn't see the number of them that we see today.

That argument doesn't hold water since social media exists equally throughout the world and this problem doesn't happen at nearly the same rate throughout the country.

We can't really get into the discussion further than that but if social media were the problem, it would be a problem universally and it isn't.

[Caulfield]

re: Off-Topic

That argument doesn't hold water since social media exists equally throughout the world and this problem doesn't happen at nearly the same rate throughout the country.

We can't really get into the discussion further than that but if social media were the problem, it would be a problem universally and it isn't.

It takes the combined effect of both traditional & social media. I think Blzr has a really good point. Remove one & the scenario is drastically different. We already know that in some places the traditional media is state run. And the social media is closely monitored by the state. The whole is greater than the sum of it's parts when it combines both medias.




T.E.A.M.
together everyone achieves more.