[QuickTidal]

Apt apparently writes for Marvel comics now and dictates how the character should be represented in all media...everyone, make a note.

[Illuyankas]

It's only fair revenge for the first Avengers comic!

Sample panel:

[Aptorian]

QuickTidal, on 21 June 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Apt apparently writes for Marvel comics now and dictates how the character should be represented in all media...everyone, make a note.

It's a question of drawing a line. What's next? Who will they storyrape next? Thanos? Maybe Thanos is just a purple alien that sparkles in the sun with a rubix cube fetish who Captain America can beat up. Then next we'll have Khang the Conquerer who's actually just lonely, his only weakness is his broken heart, he will be defeated by the beauty of Black Widow. Then we have Ultron who is a manio depressive food processor who is finally defeated when Tony Starks invents a chess machine that teaches the deadly robot that the only way to win is to drink lots of martini.

This post has been edited by Aptorius: 21 June 2012 - 06:03 PM

[Illuyankas]

Aptorius, on 21 June 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

It's a question of drawing a line. What's next? Who will they storyrape next? Thanos?

Also if you are describing an interpretation of a character you enjoy that appears to show it in an unfavourable light as 'storyrape' then you are taking it far, far too seriously and are in fact the problem, sorry.

[amphibian]

Aptorius, on 21 June 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

The Hulk would not stand a chance against Loki because Loki would never be stupid enough to get in reach of the Hulk. He'd either put the hulk to sleep or make the hulk attack the other avengers with sorcery.

Even if we use the depowered loki from this film, Loki, being a TRICKSTER GOD OF SUPERHUMAN INTELLECT AND CUNNING would have used his illusions to either backstab the hulk with "mystical stick" or just run like fuck when the hulk was looking the other way. So god damn stupid.

Didn't someone make the point that Loki purposely lost the fight to get back to Asgard and then plot his takeover from there?

 tumblr_m40x9cIwQW1qb25dg.jpg (284.41K)
Number of downloads: 0

Attached File(s)

•  image-354309-galleryV9-epss.jpg (103.11K)
  Number of downloads: 0

This post has been edited by amphibian: 21 June 2012 - 08:06 PM

[Shiara]

[flea]

I hope this is not a repost.

Attached File(s)

•  bookstore.jpg (37.37K)
  Number of downloads: 0

[Tiste Simeon]

This post contains the best spam EVER.

Attached File(s)

•  Spam.png (224.43K)
  Number of downloads: 2
•  Darth Koala.jpeg (90.25K)
  Number of downloads: 0

[Princess]

Shite bootleg time!

[Princess]

[Princess]

[Princess]

[Princess]

[Princess]

[Princess]

[Princess]

And that's all my bootlegs.

[Princess]

Oh, mustn't forget Nightmare Feddy.

[Princess]

[Princess]

[Shinrei]

worrywort, on 18 June 2012 - 03:44 AM, said:

The voting with your dollar argument doesn't sway me. People "vote" against their best interests all the time, in the booth and with their money. Nickelback have a multi-platinum album, Benny Hinn is a multi-millionaire faith healer, and Strom Thurmond existed. BTW, maybe Nickelback would still be a success without Clear Channel, but they certainly wouldn't have the advantage of total radio dominance that propelled them there through sheer repetition. The radio industry should be to the record industry what the free press is to the government, but instead it's their Pravda. Trust-busting and collusion-deterring are very much in the interest of the people, and capitalism requires that non-commercial referee. Laissez-faire capitalism ISN'T capitalism, by the nature of the beast.

As far as the USPS goes, it's dirt cheap, picks up and delivers to the vast majority of households (and in fact USPS has contracts with FedEX and UPS because they have much harder times delivering in rural areas, and they absolutely will not deliver to PO Boxes at all -- I think the last figure I read was that USPS handles ~30% of their packages at some point their delivery). I'm not suggesting it's perfect, or that it will or should last forever, but I certainly prefer it -- warts and all -- to its private counterparts, since its bottom line isn't merely profit, and I'd ultimately rather see it improved than scrapped.

A free press (and by extension media) enforced by law is a grotesque contradiction in terms. A state regulated media - how is that NOT a stage controlled media? You make it sound

Quote

Trust-busting and collusion-deterring are very much in the interest of the people, and capitalism requires that non-commercial referee.

like the government has no skin in the game of radio, like they're just this wonderful unbiased referee.


Re USPS. There is a myth that there are certain things that only the government can do, because no one in the private sector can or would want to do it. The USPS is one of those myths. The idea that a private company could not do what the USPS does is a claim that requires some proof. Currently yes, this is the case, but that is because the government has made it illegal to compete (price-wise) with the post office. The thing is, a business has to answer to customers, investors and if they do not provide the product that customers want and bring a return to investors, competition will come along and wipe it out. The government doesn't have to worry about this. There is no relationship between product and payment, so the government doesn't need to worry about getting paid. It doesn't have to worry about competition, because it has banned it. MONOPOLY is the word for that. The government doesn't need to impress investors to raise cash, all they have to do is raise taxes "for the public interest" and/or print money (which erodes the value of the money you have in your pocket).

This analogy is from Professor Murray Rothbard: If the government had a monopoly on shoe manufacture and sale, and had been providing shoes for everyone from tax revenues, then anyone who proposed that shoe production be privatized would get the same reaction as the idea of privatizing the post office.

Quote

"How could you? You are opposed to the public, to the poor people wearing shoes! And who would supply shoes to the public if the government got out of the business? How many shows would be available in each city and town? How would the shoe firm be capitalized? What material would they use? What would be the pricing arrangements? Wouldn't regulation of the shoe industry be needed to see to it the product is sound? And who would supply the poor with shoes?"

The governments mythology is so predominant, most people really do believe that if the government has been providing a monopolized service no one else could or would want to do it, unless they charged an exhorbitant price.

Attached File(s)

•  swing.jpg (405.63K)
  Number of downloads: 0