all I got was we met in a bar. why the hell do I get the easy ones......it's like a meat popsicleMental wrote:Ah, crap. I just bet my little brother $20 that that was him pranking me, not you. Still, at least I backed up my earlier assertion.
Did you choose that first sentence? That threw me off for a bit.It's funny, I was just about to post the whole conversation here myself...
Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about...
Women/IM/bars/sex, etc.
- Somehow, we still tolerate each other. Eventually this will be the only forum left.
damn, and you didn't respond to that one, either, Derith.
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
heh, well, I tried. Figured you'd at least respond. Then again, I guess I should have known that nobody is going to give out any information to get an AIM name from a bar meeting.
http://fury.com/aoliza/
Wow...this is really funny. Look at the stuff over a 8.0 vote. Some of the conversations is NSFW, but it's words only.
http://fury.com/aoliza/
Wow...this is really funny. Look at the stuff over a 8.0 vote. Some of the conversations is NSFW, but it's words only.
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
The hidden underground? Heh, or Fuckster, I mean Friendster. Always some good hits online.
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
You want really easy, head over to San Fran. When I was in Sex Addicts Anonymous up there I heard guys (straight as well as gay) talk about "sex clubs", which apparently were places for like-minded people to hook up and have easy, casual sex. Some of these guys were trying to get off these clubs like they were heroin.
I could see why. With a free supply of easy women, that would be very hard to get rid of that type of addiction. Sex is just another drug, after all.
Rosalina: But you didn't.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
Robert: But I DON'T.
Rosalina: You sure that's right?
Robert: I was going to HAVE told you they'd come?
Rosalina: No.
Robert: The subjunctive?
Rosalina: That's not the subjunctive.
Robert: I don't think the syntax has been invented yet.
Rosalina: It would have had to have had been.
Robert: Had to have...had...been? That can't be right.
I don't think so. "Process" addictions (videogames, sex, dangerous activities, etc.) have seemed to me to quite different than substance addictions, and I've met quite a number of people with each (or both).
I am not very addictable to substances, but I go for a lot of the process addictions as if they were substances to another person. Obviously, I have had (and very occasionally still have) my issues with pornography, but I also had to give my boss my copy of Warcraft III recently and tell him "give this back to me when we're done with this project", because after buying it after a 2-year hiatus, all I did when I got it was play it for three days in a row. This is the kind of thing you usually more often hear about in AA meetings - i.e. "I was dry for ten years, had a drink, and the next day I was in a hospital".
I mean, both can be destructive, but you can't kill yourself from an OD on games OR porn. I suppose the Korean internet cafe guys who've killed themselves from dehydration might be a counterexample, but I think there are some big differences there.
I am not very addictable to substances, but I go for a lot of the process addictions as if they were substances to another person. Obviously, I have had (and very occasionally still have) my issues with pornography, but I also had to give my boss my copy of Warcraft III recently and tell him "give this back to me when we're done with this project", because after buying it after a 2-year hiatus, all I did when I got it was play it for three days in a row. This is the kind of thing you usually more often hear about in AA meetings - i.e. "I was dry for ten years, had a drink, and the next day I was in a hospital".
I mean, both can be destructive, but you can't kill yourself from an OD on games OR porn. I suppose the Korean internet cafe guys who've killed themselves from dehydration might be a counterexample, but I think there are some big differences there.
For an entertaining look at sex addicts, go read Palahniuk's Choke.
"For one thing to live, another thing must be killed. God, or whoever is responsible, deserves respect for creating such a system. It reveals that we cannot take all matters into our own hands. We need only to focus on doing our best--a simple, yet profound way to live, is it not?"
I've had about all the entertaining looks at sex addicts I'd ever want - in my experience, not too many of them are tremendibly entertaining. "Suicidally depressed" would be a better description for a large number of the ones I knew.
However, doesn't mean the book wouldn't be good. What's it about?
However, doesn't mean the book wouldn't be good. What's it about?