The future of Ms POG
02-05-2017
, 11:56 PM
02-06-2017
, 01:04 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:05 AM
Quote:
It's shocking that a white dominant society might have discussions that white people enjoy. Shocking. This makes the forum more welcoming to white people at the expense of thin-skinned brown people.
Do you think minority run societies don't have the same type of conversations that men might find appropriate, offensive, or make uncomfortable? Have you been to the brown people subforum?
I know SJWs want to pretend that white people and brown people are the same, but they aren't, and we shouldn't be compelled to make them feel accepted and included in literally every thread like they are wheel chair bound.
You want to make the society more welcoming for brown people at the expense of making it less interesting for white people. And exactly how many brown people do you plan to police up with this strat? This is already a poker forum that has been grossly white people-dominated since inception for the obvious reason poker is a grossly white people-dominated game.
Odds are you lose more white people do to boredom and never get the brown people because they aren't really interested in the first place.
We have one butt hurt brown person and, as typical, we have a thousand internet white knights with their swords unsheathed.
Do you think minority run societies don't have the same type of conversations that men might find appropriate, offensive, or make uncomfortable? Have you been to the brown people subforum?
I know SJWs want to pretend that white people and brown people are the same, but they aren't, and we shouldn't be compelled to make them feel accepted and included in literally every thread like they are wheel chair bound.
You want to make the society more welcoming for brown people at the expense of making it less interesting for white people. And exactly how many brown people do you plan to police up with this strat? This is already a poker forum that has been grossly white people-dominated since inception for the obvious reason poker is a grossly white people-dominated game.
Odds are you lose more white people do to boredom and never get the brown people because they aren't really interested in the first place.
We have one butt hurt brown person and, as typical, we have a thousand internet white knights with their swords unsheathed.
Quote:
It's shocking that a heterosexual dominant society might have discussions that heterosexuals enjoy. Shocking. This makes the forum more welcoming to heterosexuals at the expense of thin-skinned gay people.
Do you think non-heterosexual run societies don't have the same type of conversations that heterosexuals might find appropriate, offensive, or make uncomfortable? Have you been to the gay subforum?
I know SJWs want to pretend that heterosexuals and homosexuals are the same, but they aren't, and we shouldn't be compelled to make them feel accepted and included in literally every thread like they are wheel chair bound.
You want to make the society more welcoming for lgbtq at the expense of making it less interesting for heterosexuals. And exactly how many lgbt people do you plan to police up with this strat? This is already a poker forum that has been grossly straight people-dominated since inception for the obvious reason poker is a grossly straight people-dominated game.
Odds are you lose more straight people do to boredom and never get the lgbt people because they aren't really interested in the first place.
We have one butt hurt gay person and, as typical, we have a thousand internet white knights with their swords unsheathed.
Do you think non-heterosexual run societies don't have the same type of conversations that heterosexuals might find appropriate, offensive, or make uncomfortable? Have you been to the gay subforum?
I know SJWs want to pretend that heterosexuals and homosexuals are the same, but they aren't, and we shouldn't be compelled to make them feel accepted and included in literally every thread like they are wheel chair bound.
You want to make the society more welcoming for lgbtq at the expense of making it less interesting for heterosexuals. And exactly how many lgbt people do you plan to police up with this strat? This is already a poker forum that has been grossly straight people-dominated since inception for the obvious reason poker is a grossly straight people-dominated game.
Odds are you lose more straight people do to boredom and never get the lgbt people because they aren't really interested in the first place.
We have one butt hurt gay person and, as typical, we have a thousand internet white knights with their swords unsheathed.
Quote:
It's shocking that a male dominant society might have discussions that males enjoy. Shocking. This makes the forum more welcoming to men at the expense of thin-skinned women.
Do you think female run societies don't have the same type of conversations that men might find appropriate, offensive, or make uncomfortable? Have you been to the woman subforum?
I know SJWs want to pretend that men and women are the same, but they aren't, and we shouldn't be compelled to make them feel accepted and included in literally every thread like they are wheel chair bound.
You want to make the society more welcoming for women at the expense of making it less interesting for men. And exactly how many women do you plan to police up with this strat? This is already a poker forum that has been grossly male-dominated since inception for the obvious reason poker is a grossly male-dominated game.
Odds are you lose more men do to boredom and never get the women because they aren't really interested in the first place.
We have one butt hurt woman and, as typical, we have a thousand internet white knights with their swords unsheathed.
Do you think female run societies don't have the same type of conversations that men might find appropriate, offensive, or make uncomfortable? Have you been to the woman subforum?
I know SJWs want to pretend that men and women are the same, but they aren't, and we shouldn't be compelled to make them feel accepted and included in literally every thread like they are wheel chair bound.
You want to make the society more welcoming for women at the expense of making it less interesting for men. And exactly how many women do you plan to police up with this strat? This is already a poker forum that has been grossly male-dominated since inception for the obvious reason poker is a grossly male-dominated game.
Odds are you lose more men do to boredom and never get the women because they aren't really interested in the first place.
We have one butt hurt woman and, as typical, we have a thousand internet white knights with their swords unsheathed.
White supremacy and homophobia would get run out of Pog without that much resistance. But for whatever reason, fill in the blanks with "male" and "female", and suddenly its a discussion numerous good, smart men will get behind. It boggles the mind.
Last edited by Crossnerd; 02-06-2017 at 01:12 AM.
02-06-2017
, 01:14 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:23 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:24 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:25 AM
well Kruze is fer it, Monkey agin it, you're neutral ... so i guess Monty is the tiebreaker?
Quote:
And just ftr, comparing the Politics thread to the Miss Pog threads is an obvious false equivalency. Politics is exactly the sort of thread that doesn't offend anyone unless you click on it, and you can choose to ignore it. Its existence in and of itself is not offensive.
Tying the politcs thread to this is just yet another pathetic attempt to justify the existence of an unjustifiable thread, and at worst an attempt to "take" something in some sort of forced quid pro quo based largely in bitterness for having to "give" something up. Sad!
If you all had such problems with the Politics thread, why didn't you start a thread like this one asking for it to be changed? My personal theory is none of you give an actual **** about the politics thread.
Its also true that if a mod had made a thread that suggested limiting or eliminating the politics thread, UD and others wouldn't have taken any issue at all with who created the thread, or the mod voicing his opinion.
Tying the politcs thread to this is just yet another pathetic attempt to justify the existence of an unjustifiable thread, and at worst an attempt to "take" something in some sort of forced quid pro quo based largely in bitterness for having to "give" something up. Sad!
If you all had such problems with the Politics thread, why didn't you start a thread like this one asking for it to be changed? My personal theory is none of you give an actual **** about the politics thread.
Its also true that if a mod had made a thread that suggested limiting or eliminating the politics thread, UD and others wouldn't have taken any issue at all with who created the thread, or the mod voicing his opinion.
02-06-2017
, 01:25 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:26 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:29 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:29 AM
02-06-2017
, 01:30 AM