Redistribution of GPA.

[Natebishop3]

You clearly missed the point of the article.

The point of the article wasn't whether or not others should want to support, give to or help those with less. I can totally understand Treaty_of_Batum's feeling that he would give up his to help another, and I do the same on my own.

The point of the article was to point out the hypocrisy of those saying that want to spread wealth around, but when put in terms that would directly and possibly negatively affect themselves, their views and opinions change.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Tell him what he's won Johnny!

 

[huevonkiller]

huevonkiller just stop. You're not making any sense.

That's not a defense, you're scared dude.

Stop bitching just because you're a hypocrite.

 

[huevonkiller]

I see GPA redistribution in almost every class I take.

There is always a weak link in group projects but the group as a whole gets the grade. Often workload is not even and the work submitted is based off of one or two people's ideas.

Is this fair? It's in the groups best interest to defer to the strongest members. If all the members contribute equally the submission might not be as strong and everyone's grade would suffer.

Good, thanks for supporting me. Lol get a clue.

 

[huevonkiller]

You clearly missed the point of the article.

The point of the article wasn't whether or not others should want to support, give to or help those with less. I can totally understand Treaty_of_Batum's feeling that he would give up his to help another, and I do the same on my own.

The point of the article was to point out the hypocrisy of those saying that want to spread wealth around, but when put in terms that would directly and possibly negatively affect themselves, their views and opinions change.

Thanks for reminding everyone.

 

[maxiep]

Now imagine if it wasn't your choice to give up some of your hard-earned GPA. Imagine if someone with no connection to you just took it and redistributed it to people you didn't know. And now imagine if that GPA was the difference between you keeping your scholarship for the next year, or getting into graduate school.

That's the entitlement state.

 

[barfo]

I'm pretty sure the US government has "some connection" to us.

barfo

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

You clearly missed the point of the article.

I didn't read the article. I was "going with the flow" of the conversation.

The point of the article wasn't whether or not others should want to support, give to or help those with less. I can totally understand Treaty_of_Batum's feeling that he would give up his to help another, and I do the same on my own.

The point of the article was to point out the hypocrisy of those saying that want to spread wealth around, but when put in terms that would directly and possibly negatively affect themselves, their views and opinions change.

Thanks for the summary (not sarcasm). I pretty much agree with this sentiment. Humans will always be for something in theory and then not in practice. I am willing to guess that 90% of the people who would check "in favor" for lowering their standard of living in order to raise everyone below them would not do so if given the actual, tangible opportunity. This isn't the kind of thing you need to watch Fox and Friends to understand.

 

[huevonkiller]

I think huevonkiller is my new favorite poster. He's like if BenDavis503 spent all his time drinking Rockstar and scanning wikipedia articles while half-listening to Michael Savage. Also hating commas. Why do you hate commas?



You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to barfo again.

First off "hk" is much shorter and everyone will know who you're talking about. I can tell you're not very good with math.

Second barfo is just bitter, he has a clownish defense while I've studied Constitutional Law. He fucked up and contradicted himself. His argument is proven wrong by the deficits run up in congress as well.

 

[huevonkiller]

When you want to man up and provide evidence I'm right here, even barfo bows down to me he admitted how much more efficient the industry now is. And given his ignorant assertion that passengers were the only ones affected, I knocked his argument out nigguh.

"you're wrong because I say so", that's not a very bright defense.

 

[huevonkiller]

This is a great post and probably because I'm a namby-pamby-socio-commu-marxi-muslim liberal.

But it gets to the heart of one thing that many conservatives don't want to accept: that people are inherently different, come from different areas of life, have different views on what is important, and have different social situations. Cutting funding that millions of people depend on (and not just because they are lazy, stop rolling your eyes) will not "inventivize" them, it will simply make the crack they slip through open up that much quicker.

And GOD, don't you hate it when filthy bums ask you for money? Why don't they get a job?

Wow you are a joke, especially in this economy we are now in.


This kind of thinking bankrupted our nation with your coward programs. Let's review:

1. The public sector is worthless, and always inferior to the private sector. In this case the airline industry saw a superb impact by privatizing.

2. The reason the Civil Rights act works, is because of interstate commerce and the commerce clause. Do some reading before you try to look slick by deepthroating another liberal who you like more. Congress asserts that interstate congress is affected by channels, instrumentality, and activities.

3. Interstate commerce puts a burden on all consumers not just the redneck motel or the inefficient airline you want to run. It affects all consumers by burdening them, barfo said this wasn't the case. However by acknowledging the pejorative impact regulation has he has contradicted himself. Congress has continually acknowledged that commerce is affected in the ways I mentioned in #2.

4. The Economic metrics destroy your argument since we continue to overspend and over regulate private industries. The airline industry is a perfect example.

Don't try your weakass attacks unless you have advanced metrics behind you. Your subjective opinion means jack shit the Supreme Court is the law.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

First off "hk" is much shorter and everyone will know who you're talking about.

Thanks for the pro-tip, hk.

I can tell you're not very good with math.

Hmm. And I can yell you're not very good with making relevant comments.

Second barfo is a clown I've studied Constitutional Law he fucked up. His argument is proven wrong by the deficits run up in congress as well.

Let's not go over the massive display of ignorance that barfo displays at every level. Let's start a little smaller: your use of punctuation. For example: the sentence, "Second barfo is a clown I've studied Constitutional Law he fucked up," is lacking a little bit. As a Constitutional scholar, I'm sure you'll agree that proper punctuation underlies the weight in which readers give your written arguments. So, let's work together on this (don't worry, I'm a trained professional.)

Try this: "Second, barfo is a clown. I've studied Constitutional Law. He fucked up. " Alternatively, you can use a conjunction to make those ideas flow a little better: "Second, barfo is a clown. I've studied Constitutional Law and he fucked up."

I hope this helped.

Wow you are a joke, especially in this economy we are now in.


This kind of thinking bankrupted our nation with your coward programs. Let's review:

1. The public sector is worthless, and always inferior to the private sector. In this case the airline industry saw a superb impact by privatizing.

2. The reason the Civil Rights act works, is because of interstate commerce and the commerce clause. Do some reading before you try to look slick by deepthroating another liberal who you like more. Congress asserts that interstate congress is affected by channels, instrumentality, and activities.

3. Interstate commerce puts a burden on all consumers not just the redneck motel or the inefficient airline you want to run. It affects all consumers by burdening them, barfo said this wasn't the case. However by acknowledging the pejorative impact regulation has he has contradicted himself. Congress has continually acknowledged that commerce is affected in the ways I mentioned in #2.

4. The Economic metrics destroy your argument since we continue to overspend and over regulate private industries. The airline industry is a perfect example.

Don't try your weakass attacks unless you have advanced metrics behind you. Your subjective opinion means jack shit the Supreme Court is the law.

Purple monkey dishwasher.

Instead of asking you if you've ever suffered a stroke and/or received a traumatic brain injury, I will assume that you hit the quote button on the wrong post because none of that made sense to what I was talking about. Or, maybe you think me and barfo are the same guy, and you're continuing your nonsense arguments with me instead of him. The mind boggles.

 

[huevonkiller]

Thanks for the pro-tip, hk.


Hmm. And I can yell you're not very good with making relevant comments.

Damn look at this high and mighty guy choking, it is spelled "tell". Nice try.

I can tell you're not very good at this. I hope I helped you now.

Let's not go over the massive display of ignorance that barfo displays at every level. Let's start a little smaller: your use of punctuation. For example: the sentence, "Second barfo is a clown I've studied Constitutional Law he fucked up," is lacking a little bit. As a Constitutional scholar, I'm sure you'll agree that proper punctuation underlies the weight in which readers give your written arguments. So, let's work together on this (don't worry, I'm a trained professional.)

Try this: "Second, barfo is a clown. I've studied Constitutional Law. He fucked up. " Alternatively, you can use a conjunction to make those ideas flow a little better: "Second, barfo is a clown. I've studied Constitutional Law and he fucked up."

Haha ok, nevermind you're overusing commas and ignoring semicolons. Shut the fuck up my English teacher hates comma junkies like you.

At the end of the day you don't have a single mathematical argument to make. That's my specialty along with reading about the Supreme Court.

Purple monkey dishwasher.

Instead of asking you if you've ever suffered a stroke and/or received a traumatic brain injury, I will assume that you hit the quote button on the wrong post because none of that made sense to what I was talking about. Or, maybe you think me and barfo are the same guy, and you're continuing your nonsense arguments with me instead of him. The mind boggles.

"You're wrong because I say so hk"

Sorry that's not going to work.

 

[huevonkiller]

When you criticize someone over a minutia it comes back to bite you in the ass.

Barfo had to learn that the hard way, I've read more about the Supreme Court than he ever will.

 

[BrianFromWA]

For the record, I think it's "minutiae."

 

[bluefrog]

That's not a defense, you're scared dude.

You went back to add THAT?!?

Stop bitching just because you're a hypocrite.

How am I a "hypocrite"?!?!?! Are you sure you don't me "jerk" or "fuck-tard" or "numb-nuts". "Hypocrite" doesn't really apply here. Learn how to trash talk then post.

 

[barfo]

When you criticize someone over minutia it comes back to bite you in the ass.

Barfo had to learn that the hard way I've read more about the Supreme Court than he ever will.

Yes, I'll probably never recover from minutiae biting me in the ass. All those tiny little puncture wounds.

I am going to write to the President to ask him to appoint you to the Supreme Court whenever the next vacancy occurs. Our nation can't afford not to take advantage of the skills of a crack legal scholar such as yourself. Your talent is being wasted. You belong on the highest court in the land.

barfo

 

[Fogojam]

When you criticize someone over minutia it comes back to bite you in the ass.

Barfo had to learn that the hard way, I've read more about the Supreme Court than he ever will.

As a neutral lurker, I will say you should probably just stop. You're looking pretty bad here.

It was painful enough to make me want to actually post.

 

[huevonkiller]

For the record, I think it's "minutiae."

No it isn't............... Sorry.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/minutia

Respect me.

 

[huevonkiller]

You went back to add THAT?!?



How am I a "hypocrite"?!?!?! Are you sure you don't me "jerk" or "fuck-tard" or "numb-nuts". "Hypocrite" doesn't really apply here. Learn how to trash talk then post.

Oh really I missed the post where you stated your conservative economic principles.

 

[huevonkiller]

It's probably not wise to moan and holler over grammar when you all blow it like this so easily.

As a neutral lurker, I will say you should probably just stop. You're looking pretty bad here.

It was painful enough to make me want to actually post.

As a more intelligent person, I think you should provide me with a statistical defense rather than just complaining about me.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

As a neutral lurker, I will say you should probably just stop. You're looking pretty bad here.

It was painful enough to make me want to actually post.

for real huevon, go back to the laker forum err...i mean heat forum errr...is there a lebron james forum?

 

[huevonkiller]

Yeah I know right.

 

[huevonkiller]

Well the truth hurts, stop fucking bitching about grammar when you all suck at it.

for real huevon, go back to the laker forum err...i mean heat forum errr...is there a lebron james forum?

Brain provide me a statistical defense and I'll take it all back.

I'll become a Blazer fan for life, and denounce Miami.

 

[BrianFromWA]

No it isn't............... Sorry.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/minutia

Respect me.

No need to be sorry, you either misspelled the plural or misused the singular. Happens all the time. But where were we?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

but the supreme court is his specialty!

 

[huevonkiller]

No need to be sorry, you either misspelled the plural or misused the singular. Happens all the time. But where were we?

Ah sorry this is true, I thought I typed "over a minutia". I didn't intend to use the plural.

It is weird to see so many people obsessed with a spelling error though. Their arguments are not very genuine they're just bitter they have no mathematical foundation.

 

[huevonkiller]

but the supreme court is his specialty!

It is, it is called Constitutional Law Limits.

There's also Constitutional Law Powers if you do well the first semester, you have to take it over one year.

 

[bluefrog]

Oh really I missed the post where you stated your conservative economic principles.

I'm a hypocrite for not having conservative economic principles?

 

[huevonkiller]

I'm a hypocrite for not having conservative economic principles?

Yes you're a hypocrite, both amount to exactly the same thing.

 

[Fogojam]

I'm a hypocrite for not having conservative economic principles?

Yet he's not after complaining about people criticizing his spelling after doing it to someone else 5 posts earlier.

Damn look at this high and mighty guy choking, it is spelled "tell". Nice try.

Ah sorry this is true, I thought I typed "over a minutia". I didn't intend to use the plural.

It is weird to see so many people obsessed with a spelling error though.