The Crotch
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 15 (100%)
No on 24! No! On! 24!
CheapyD = Homophobic?
- Thread starter Arcademode
- Start date
DestroVega
CAGiversary!
I'm from CT... tons of people here use the word "gay" as a word to replace "lame"... as Cheapy pointed out...
I have nothing against gay people, I will be voting no on #1 in CT today, but it's just something I have always done...
Recently, my girlfriend, who never tried to change anything about me, did put her foot down, she didn't want me saying it anymore, and I've made a real effort not to.
I guess it's a good thing. not like I NEED to use the word.
I have nothing against gay people, I will be voting no on #1 in CT today, but it's just something I have always done...
Recently, my girlfriend, who never tried to change anything about me, did put her foot down, she didn't want me saying it anymore, and I've made a real effort not to.
I guess it's a good thing. not like I NEED to use the word.
mrchainsaw
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 14 (100%)
Good, I come for the CAGs, not the $$$s.
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']i really doubt its him selling ads to prop 8 people but him selling space to someone who sells to prop 8. I mean I have seen a bunch of McCain stuff, and Cheapy seems at least moderate if not liberal.[/quote]
I come for the nipplage in this guy's sig
I come for the nipplage in this guy's sig
PhrostByte
CAG Newbie
Is 'Gay = Bad' strictly East Coast slang? Or is it nationwide?
VAD3R or Fro
CAGiversary!
Oh I cant wait till the next CAGcast.
hiccupleftovers
CAGiversary!
[quote name='CheapyD']It was a joke.
[/QUOTE]
Cheapy, you shouldn't have conceded to him; you should have kept the joke going:lol: I was enjoying it. Anti-religious:lol:
[quote name='PhrostByte']Is 'Gay = Bad' strictly East Coast slang? Or is it nationwide?[/QUOTE]
Nationwide. I've been saying that in Cali, Nevada, and LA
Cheapy, you shouldn't have conceded to him; you should have kept the joke going:lol: I was enjoying it. Anti-religious:lol:
[quote name='PhrostByte']Is 'Gay = Bad' strictly East Coast slang? Or is it nationwide?[/QUOTE]
Nationwide. I've been saying that in Cali, Nevada, and LA
mrchainsaw
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 14 (100%)
[quote name='lilboo']Moron[/quote]
I'm completely kidding...about not coming for the money. I prefer the community.
I'm completely kidding...about not coming for the money. I prefer the community.
Look, chaps are just funny, no matter what your orientation is. Although i cringe when people use the word "gay," instead of stupid, it is generally harmless. If i hear no hate in the voice, i don't worry about it too much. It's childish, and silly, but hey, it is the internet, where people are perpetually Thirteen.
I too doubt Cheepsters does this on the podcast as stated, you know, considering he is generally an adult, and considerate of his readers. I find people on this site to be fairly open minded, and have never gotten any flack for the handle I choose to use. His response to the ads was swift and reasonable. Basically, this thread is much to do about nothing. No outrage here.
I too doubt Cheepsters does this on the podcast as stated, you know, considering he is generally an adult, and considerate of his readers. I find people on this site to be fairly open minded, and have never gotten any flack for the handle I choose to use. His response to the ads was swift and reasonable. Basically, this thread is much to do about nothing. No outrage here.
PhrostByte
CAG Newbie
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRmy4E4EOQA[/media]
CheapyD's responses in this thread have un-lesbianed me a little. 
But just a little.
Anyway, I seriously hate the use of the word "gay" as slang for stupid, bad, dumb, lame, etc etc. I don't know how anyone can't see how that'd be terribly insulting if you were gay. Quantifying something like that by saying, "but I don't mean it that way" doesn't make it any less offensive. Sorry. There's a million words in the English language you can use instead. I'm all for cursing, too.
There's some unintentional comedy on this site, but I think it makes a good effort at trying to stamp out the ignorance about this:
http://www.thinkb4youspeak.com/
But just a little.Anyway, I seriously hate the use of the word "gay" as slang for stupid, bad, dumb, lame, etc etc. I don't know how anyone can't see how that'd be terribly insulting if you were gay. Quantifying something like that by saying, "but I don't mean it that way" doesn't make it any less offensive. Sorry. There's a million words in the English language you can use instead. I'm all for cursing, too.
There's some unintentional comedy on this site, but I think it makes a good effort at trying to stamp out the ignorance about this:
http://www.thinkb4youspeak.com/
You know, I used to be all for not using "gay", "retarded", etc. because of offending people but I'm just tired of it. I don't hate people from either group and I know that for myself so if I say it oh well I'm just 
ing tired of pussyfooting around in an attempt to not offend people anymore. No one goes out of their way to not offend me, why should I be held to a higher standard? Being offended is just what life is about.
ing tired of pussyfooting around in an attempt to not offend people anymore. No one goes out of their way to not offend me, why should I be held to a higher standard? Being offended is just what life is about.
PhrostByte
CAG Newbie
[quote name='Synergy']CheapyD's responses in this thread have un-lesbianed me a little. But just a little.
Anyway, I seriously hate the use of the word "gay" as slang for stupid, bad, dumb, lame, etc etc. I don't know how anyone can't see how that'd be terribly insulting if you were gay. Quantifying something like that by saying, "but I don't mean it that way" doesn't make it any less offensive. Sorry. There's a million words in the English language you can use instead. I'm all for cursing, too.
There's some unintentional comedy on this site, but I think it makes a good effort at trying to stamp out the ignorance about this:
http://www.thinkb4youspeak.com/[/quote]
Using other words is gay though.
But just a little.Anyway, I seriously hate the use of the word "gay" as slang for stupid, bad, dumb, lame, etc etc. I don't know how anyone can't see how that'd be terribly insulting if you were gay. Quantifying something like that by saying, "but I don't mean it that way" doesn't make it any less offensive. Sorry. There's a million words in the English language you can use instead. I'm all for cursing, too.
There's some unintentional comedy on this site, but I think it makes a good effort at trying to stamp out the ignorance about this:
http://www.thinkb4youspeak.com/[/quote]
Using other words is gay though.
bigdaddybruce44
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 26 (100%)
[quote name='RedvsBlue']You know, I used to be all for not using "gay", "retarded", etc. because of offending people but I'm just tired of it. I don't hate people from either group and I know that for myself so if I say it oh well I'm just ing tired of pussyfooting around in an attempt to not offend people anymore. No one goes out of their way to not offend me, why should I be held to a higher standard? Being offended is just what life is about.[/quote]
Exactly. End of story. Stop being offended by language. All you do by getting "outraged" is give power to the words. And in this case, there isn't even any power being sought. It's just stupid slang.
ing tired of pussyfooting around in an attempt to not offend people anymore. No one goes out of their way to not offend me, why should I be held to a higher standard? Being offended is just what life is about.[/quote]Exactly. End of story. Stop being offended by language. All you do by getting "outraged" is give power to the words. And in this case, there isn't even any power being sought. It's just stupid slang.
hiccupleftovers
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Chase']This thread sucks.[/QUOTE]
Correction, This thread is gay.
Correction, This thread is gay.
[quote name='Arcademode']Wow, Google thinks I'm gay, WTF!
Thanks Frisky for clearing this up. Looks like Cheapy's trying to do something about these ads after all.
And everyone else is missing the point of my argument.
In simple terms: I'm saying that it's bad from a business standpoint to ruin the relationship with potential customers. That's why these ads aren't a good idea. Dumb answers like "then they can leave" do nothing but prove my point further.[/QUOTE]
Not much for logic, are you?
If Google, by some remarkable algorithm, decided you were gay, why would they show you an ad you would likely regard as hostile? If Google is making any judgments of your proclivities by showing you the ad, it is that you would be sympathetic to the cause being promoted. Unless, of course, the objective is not to gather votes but instead just to with people. (Something I could really get behind. If I were a bored billionaire my ad budget for non-existent products or causes would be in the eight digit range.)
Further, you make the mistake of assuming a business cannot prosper by demographic discrimination. This, in fact, is at the heart of this site's intent. It isn't 'cheapasswhatever.com,' it's cheapassgamer.com. Already the target audience is narrowed down to those interested in obtaining games for less than the normal retail price at release. Further, while not entirely explicit in the name, the target audience is one that takes gaming as a hobby fairly seriously, to the extent that they would spend goodly amounts of time researching the subject here and discussing related issues. Further still, that the company of their fellow cheapass gamers would be favorable to discussing non-gaming subjects, although those tend to follow in demography of the self-identified gamer.
So the kind of person whose primary gaming interest runs to 'Barbie's Horse Adventures' can receive a less than hospitable reception on this site with little fear of damaging the business. Requiring the visitors here to be nice to the 'Barbie's horse Adventure' aficionado would likely drive away a considerable number.
Personally, I voted for Prop. 8. But I don't just want to eliminate gay marriage, I want to eliminate marriage as a governmental arbitrated entity. I no more want the government involved in marriage than in setting rules for who gets to take Communion at a Catholic church. Their religion, they can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't interfere with personal right defined in the Constitution.
If I really hated gays I'd do whatever I could to inflict legally binding marriage upon them. Why should they miss out on the joys of alimony, or better yet, palimony? As far as I care, the only point at which the government has any business getting involved in romantic relationships is if children result. It is the duty of government to represent the interests of citizens who cannot perform this task for themselves. Everything else is easily covered under standard contract law.
The way I'd like to have it, if you can find a church or other organization willing to marry you to another person, or a horse, or a street lamp, go for it. The little piece of paper they issue will have no legally binding significance to the rest of the world. The government should only get involved if you get the street lamp pregnant and refused to participate in the support of the resulting offspring.
Thanks Frisky for clearing this up. Looks like Cheapy's trying to do something about these ads after all.
And everyone else is missing the point of my argument.
In simple terms: I'm saying that it's bad from a business standpoint to ruin the relationship with potential customers. That's why these ads aren't a good idea. Dumb answers like "then they can leave" do nothing but prove my point further.[/QUOTE]
Not much for logic, are you?
If Google, by some remarkable algorithm, decided you were gay, why would they show you an ad you would likely regard as hostile? If Google is making any judgments of your proclivities by showing you the ad, it is that you would be sympathetic to the cause being promoted. Unless, of course, the objective is not to gather votes but instead just to
with people. (Something I could really get behind. If I were a bored billionaire my ad budget for non-existent products or causes would be in the eight digit range.)Further, you make the mistake of assuming a business cannot prosper by demographic discrimination. This, in fact, is at the heart of this site's intent. It isn't 'cheapasswhatever.com,' it's cheapassgamer.com. Already the target audience is narrowed down to those interested in obtaining games for less than the normal retail price at release. Further, while not entirely explicit in the name, the target audience is one that takes gaming as a hobby fairly seriously, to the extent that they would spend goodly amounts of time researching the subject here and discussing related issues. Further still, that the company of their fellow cheapass gamers would be favorable to discussing non-gaming subjects, although those tend to follow in demography of the self-identified gamer.
So the kind of person whose primary gaming interest runs to 'Barbie's Horse Adventures' can receive a less than hospitable reception on this site with little fear of damaging the business. Requiring the visitors here to be nice to the 'Barbie's horse Adventure' aficionado would likely drive away a considerable number.
Personally, I voted for Prop. 8. But I don't just want to eliminate gay marriage, I want to eliminate marriage as a governmental arbitrated entity. I no more want the government involved in marriage than in setting rules for who gets to take Communion at a Catholic church. Their religion, they can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't interfere with personal right defined in the Constitution.
If I really hated gays I'd do whatever I could to inflict legally binding marriage upon them. Why should they miss out on the joys of alimony, or better yet, palimony? As far as I care, the only point at which the government has any business getting involved in romantic relationships is if children result. It is the duty of government to represent the interests of citizens who cannot perform this task for themselves. Everything else is easily covered under standard contract law.
The way I'd like to have it, if you can find a church or other organization willing to marry you to another person, or a horse, or a street lamp, go for it. The little piece of paper they issue will have no legally binding significance to the rest of the world. The government should only get involved if you get the street lamp pregnant and refused to participate in the support of the resulting offspring.
PhrostByte
CAG Newbie
[quote name='epobirs']Not much for logic, are you?
If Google, by some remarkable algorithm, decided you were gay, why would they show you an ad you would likely regard as hostile? If Google is making any judgments of your proclivities by showing you the ad, it is that you would be sympathetic to the cause being promoted. Unless, of course, the objective is not to gather votes but instead just to with people. (Something I could really get behind. If I were a bored billionaire my ad budget for non-existent products or causes would be in the eight digit range.)
Further, you make the mistake of assuming a business cannot prosper by demographic discrimination. This, in fact, is at the heart of this site's intent. It isn't 'cheapasswhatever.com,' it's cheapassgamer.com. Already the target audience is narrowed down to those interested in obtaining games for less than the normal retail price at release. Further, while not entirely explicit in the name, the target audience is one that takes gaming as a hobby fairly seriously, to the extent that they would spend goodly amounts of time researching the subject here and discussing related issues. Further still, that the company of their fellow cheapass gamers would be favorable to discussing non-gaming subjects, although those tend to follow in demography of the self-identified gamer.
So the kind of person whose primary gaming interest runs to 'Barbie's Horse Adventures' can receive a less than hospitable reception on this site with little fear of damaging the business. Requiring the visitors here to be nice to the 'Barbie's horse Adventure' aficionado would likely drive away a considerable number.
Personally, I voted for Prop. 8. But I don't just want to eliminate gay marriage, I want to eliminate marriage as a governmental arbitrated entity. I no more want the government involved in marriage than in setting rules for who gets to take Communion at a Catholic church. Their religion, they can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't interfere with personal right defined in the Constitution.
If I really hated gays I'd do whatever I could to inflict legally binding marriage upon them. Why should they miss out on the joys of alimony, or better yet, palimony? As far as I care, the only point at which the government has any business getting involved in romantic relationships is if children result. It is the duty of government to represent the interests of citizens who cannot perform this task for themselves. Everything else is easily covered under standard contract law.
The way I'd like to have it, if you can find a church or other organization willing to marry you to another person, or a horse, or a street lamp, go for it. The little piece of paper they issue will have no legally binding significance to the rest of the world. The government should only get involved if you get the street lamp pregnant and refused to participate in the support of the resulting offspring.[/quote]
TG;DR
If Google, by some remarkable algorithm, decided you were gay, why would they show you an ad you would likely regard as hostile? If Google is making any judgments of your proclivities by showing you the ad, it is that you would be sympathetic to the cause being promoted. Unless, of course, the objective is not to gather votes but instead just to
with people. (Something I could really get behind. If I were a bored billionaire my ad budget for non-existent products or causes would be in the eight digit range.)Further, you make the mistake of assuming a business cannot prosper by demographic discrimination. This, in fact, is at the heart of this site's intent. It isn't 'cheapasswhatever.com,' it's cheapassgamer.com. Already the target audience is narrowed down to those interested in obtaining games for less than the normal retail price at release. Further, while not entirely explicit in the name, the target audience is one that takes gaming as a hobby fairly seriously, to the extent that they would spend goodly amounts of time researching the subject here and discussing related issues. Further still, that the company of their fellow cheapass gamers would be favorable to discussing non-gaming subjects, although those tend to follow in demography of the self-identified gamer.
So the kind of person whose primary gaming interest runs to 'Barbie's Horse Adventures' can receive a less than hospitable reception on this site with little fear of damaging the business. Requiring the visitors here to be nice to the 'Barbie's horse Adventure' aficionado would likely drive away a considerable number.
Personally, I voted for Prop. 8. But I don't just want to eliminate gay marriage, I want to eliminate marriage as a governmental arbitrated entity. I no more want the government involved in marriage than in setting rules for who gets to take Communion at a Catholic church. Their religion, they can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't interfere with personal right defined in the Constitution.
If I really hated gays I'd do whatever I could to inflict legally binding marriage upon them. Why should they miss out on the joys of alimony, or better yet, palimony? As far as I care, the only point at which the government has any business getting involved in romantic relationships is if children result. It is the duty of government to represent the interests of citizens who cannot perform this task for themselves. Everything else is easily covered under standard contract law.
The way I'd like to have it, if you can find a church or other organization willing to marry you to another person, or a horse, or a street lamp, go for it. The little piece of paper they issue will have no legally binding significance to the rest of the world. The government should only get involved if you get the street lamp pregnant and refused to participate in the support of the resulting offspring.[/quote]
TG;DR
bread's done