/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal

>>165305
The nigger porn isn't funny. It's just gay.

>>165306
But anon, hes 'owning' me by showing his gay porn. Cant you see what an epic win it is?

>>165305
Yes, I knew Atlas. He has a pair of custom cutting boards I handmade.
Yes I referenced an anon (neet? Neets dont have jobs) who works at a bank, who likes to criticize people for working for jews.
And yes, there is a lawyer around here. Sue me for noticing.
And yet, theres all this gay porn from (you).
Fuck y'all

>>165306
I disagree. I thinks it's funny. That being said, niggers are just a coincidence and I'm just randomly getting porn that his head can be shopped into.
I encourage everyone to do the same.
>>165308
>he keeps omitting the context, thus missing the point to hide his true character
>Fuck y'all
You wish you could. I will NEVAR go back out to your brother's ranch and fuck you again. You didn't even pay me like you said you would.

I rest my case

Remember when I suggested the staff was compromised? When you simply wouldn't get the T-Revengers joke?
Well, you immediately said that was not the case. You took the time to explain, told me to take your own words with a grain of salt. You were visibly concerned about starting a crusade against staff under false premises. So much so you just abandoned your momentum to sort things out.

It speaks volumes about your honesty and commitment for the site, and for that, I'll always respect you.
Please anon, just reconsider what I posted earlier, my ID might have changed but it's still me.

This is the last one, going to bed now.

Golly, what happened to the last one? I hadnt finished fapping yet!

>>165313
Mods taking your side won't make you less of a faggot. Ban me.

>>165314
Not by my hand, Id have you keep illustrating what a faggot you are. Oh well.

>>165314
I got a report about gay porn spam. I haven't caught up on this thread to even take a side. Why are you derailing the discussion anyway?

>>165316
So, how much do you know about my post history? Don't play with fire. I forgave you then and shouldn't have.
>>165317
>Why are you derailing the discussion anyway?
Because he shits up other threads on the regular. He dishes it out, but can't take it. I don't see why he should be above the standards of anyone else. I don't see why someone shouldn't be able to come into his special play and call him a faggot. That being said, do what you gotta do. No hard feelings.

>>165318
>cant take it
Excuse me? Ive taken more than anyone on the site EVER during your liþle temper tantrum. Go on, posture more.
>>165317
Hes still mad cuz I said his post was off topic. See >>165227

>>165318
Yes, but they are most often tangentially related or mentioning staff and his dissatisfaction with them, which is not against the rules. Meanwhile, using sensitive information in images while claiming to be fighting back is not how to go about it in the slightest. Engage with the material in the thread and if you see him going off topic in another thread, refer him back to the topic of said thread.

>>165318
Huh, pretty sure he was talking about me here >>165316

>Because he shits up other threads on the regular. He dishes it out, but can't take it. I don't see why he should be above the standards of anyone else.
He's probably the most heavily scrutinised poster in the entire site.

>>165319
You apparently can't take it, given how your being protected.
It's east to argue against someone that could possibly get banned for any post. Again, me getting banned won't make you less of a faggot.

>>165318
>I forgave you and I shouldnt
So, were you full of shit then, and/or are you full of shit now?

>>165322
Im the LAST person staff will protect. Ngl, Im surprised (pleasantly) that staff isnt letting us sort this ourselves, so ur barking uo the wrong tree on that one.
If staff deciding "whoah, u gone too far" when u clearly have means "I cant take it", I cant imagine what 2+2= in ur mind.

>>165323
Oh, nevermind. >>165321

>>165325
Ur fine, I have no animus toward you

>>165322
You won't be banned. Just please stay on topic. You can always make a thread on /qa/ if you feel so inclined to make a detailed discussion and ask staff positions on the matter, but I don't think this is a fight worth having. I would much rather users work together to make a quality site despite how much we get on each other's nerves.

>>165324
I prefer things get settled without intervention, so it doesn't appear the staff is playing favorites with anyone, as it immediately appeared to be for this user. But this is clearly something that is not able to be resolved and put back on track without it.

>>165320
>sensitive information in images
It's based off of an image he posted of himself. I'm not even doxing him and his brother's gay wood company or anything. Just poking fun because it elicits a reaction. Ban me if you must.

>>165327
I can speak to this at length, but it really boils down to "I made him mad some time ago and he wanted to stick it to me".
His shoopsnwere pretty decent, nevermind the gay porn

>>165328
Dont be coy. I cropped the images, and you extracted the source image. Dont act like I just wantonly posted my face,

>>165326
Nah, I just got confused. Thought you meant this one >>>/sp/19231 →

It's on me tho.

>>165331
All good, but no, not thenapology I was talking about. Anon knows tho

>>165328
Please work on reading comprehension. There is no ban. And poking fun is simple and effective without sensitive information, no matter how public. This board values anonymity and privacy. This needs to be reflected in your own behavior so no one is tempted to become far too careless with personal information. It is true he posted the image himself. It is not yours to reupload carelessly.
And see below:

>>165329
Photoshop would be handy used for pony related art. Perhaps a thread on using this for the right reasons is the way to go?

>>165334
Eh, I doubt any progress would come of it. Anon is unsatisfied, so its presumable that he'll be waiting for "his moment" no matter what.
He isnt wrong though, I have taken liberties. Not for the reasons suggested, but the flippancy WAS there, so if Im being honest this IS largely on me (at least, his frustration is). I can acknowledge that.

>>165332
>>165335
It was a cool deer though. But to start to steer back on topic, this thread might see activity again when another thread gets made, hopefully on the soon-ish side of things.

>>165334
> This board values anonymity and privacy.
Yet he posts his own face. Somehow I'm the bad guy for using it when similar shit is above board for him.
>It is not yours to reupload carelessly.
My hard drive says otherwise. Once it's publicly online, it's there forever and part of the public domain.
That being said, I'm done. Fuck it. Protect your cow.

>>165337
It is his image. He can post it if he wants. That doesn't mean you get to throw it back in his face. We don't want that to happen to you should that ever come about, so afford him the same luxury. This way we protect all of our anons while using the site.

>protect your cow
I do hope you calm down and see that this is in the best interest of all users.

>>165336
Tbh, this thread wasnt intended to have much activity; more of me compiling media and resources to make a case with later, while also making the material available if anyone felt bored/compelled. Ill return to the subject matter in the morning.
Biggest gain: learning how much anon has it out for me ^_^

https://youtu.be/KHC4mSUMrBk
Genetically Modified Skeptic discussing with Dr. Bart Ehrman about how historical analysis and evidence of the time of the gospels is NOT intended to undermine either the church or the accepted story of Jesus, rather to BETTER understand the story and what may have actually happened that developed into the Bible of today.

>>164709
>1902: Key to predicting the future
>>165119
>2040 seems plausible, but 138 years seems... I cant refute it

Moar on that and I believe it clarifies the sources (records). Among the incredible and numerous peculiarities is the fact the most today's S&P 500 companies miraculously popped up in 1902. A really interesting chat.
>Max Igan in Conversation with Jason Breshears - Archaix - July 31st 2022
>This is a completely unedited, no frills, free flowing conversation.
https://odysee.com/@thecrowhouse:2/Max-Igan-in-conversation-Jason-Breshears:1
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/IfTXtTD1bOfN/

Got a request here. I didn't remembered this before, but here it is.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrat_bat_Mahlat

Since there's substantial talk about le Kabbalah here; I would like to know if you have something to add or point out as false from that article.
Just a freenly request.

>>165428
I still have some cross referencing to do yet but as far as archetypes are concerned, I'm leaning toward the idea that the prescribed interpretation of jews is probably not right in some way and this is no exception. I did find the references and relevance to Lilith quite timely, given recent activity in the Bible study thread.

>>165431
Glad to see you've looked into it, thanks Anon.

>I did find the references and relevance to Lilith quite timely, given recent activity in the Bible study thread.
Yeah, am the same Anon posting Hu Tao (>picrel) in that bread. Sorry if I came off a bit too defensive btw. Am ill-suited to discuss the subject matter as it is, and just wanted to give my two cents on the meme, borrowing from my personal experience.
So, I'm just a curious Anon here, hoping to learn a thing or two.

>>165432
Okay. With regard to Agrat specifically.
She is specifically likened, associated, and attributable to sorcery and the wild woman archetype. To the call her a demon is appropriate, as she is directly asserted to have advanced knowledge of spirit (demon being derived from daemon).
Being that the jews have opted for a right-hand path interpretation of Khaballistic legend, its quite understandable that they would be less appreciative of an infominable spirit, which ironically is the Luciferian spirit.
This coincides with that she is said to be the daughter/granddaughter of Lilith, who is the progenitor of the wild/wise woman archetype.
The early story of Lilith is that when given a proper mate who would challenge man to be greater than he has been, man balked and faltered and failed to meet his potential. This is why Lilith rejected man's primacy, because man had rejected his own primacy, but rather than acknowledge it, opted to try to suppress the female instead (literally, the divine female) and the God of the old testament (Yyaldabaoth/Baldur, NOT a true creator god) who was tasked with trying to perpetuate humanity (think the ship computer from Wall-E) said "Ur right, fuck that bitch, heres a supplicant/subordinate woman.
Because Yyaldabaoth/Baldur wanted HUMANITY to be a supplicant/subordinate, because he COULDNT create he could only try to mold, so if he fucked up what was left of humanity he couldnt fix it.

>>165432
>>165428
It was very interesting to investigate. Ngl, there are observe parallels between Agrat and immediate family and phenomena Ive observed in creative ventures. It will certainly add to.mh repertoire,and I maintain that the jewish conclusion (excuse me, "orthodox" conclusion) is precisely backward for all the reasons one might assess a jewish position to be backward.

>>165446
Very interesting Anon, nice. If what you say is correct, I can see it does actually line up with what the femmes believe, at least to a certain point and even if coincidentally.
I kinda wonder what your thoughts are on Tanya the Evil. With your gnosticism and all that.

>>165448
Am glad you found it interesting, and I greatly appreciate your response. If you don't mind me asking, you aren't a regular Gnostic are you?

>>165472
>Tanya the Evil
One of my favorite anime protagonists. Obviously her history is a little contrived and all, but otherwise spectacular; a model for all sociopaths who dont want to be all about themselves.

>>165472
>regular gnostic
I dont consider myself a gnostic at all, though their material has been quite useful and informative at interval. I consider myself a Luficerian of proprietary pagan tradition centered/focused around (you're surprised?) Ninjas.

I'll take an opportunity to illustrate the great divide in religious/philosphical existence.
There is no such thing as a religion that doesnt involve rules, precepts, directions, etc. Ostensibly, these rules are geared toward creating a stronger person, a stronger family, a stronger community, and a stronger society. Without being specific of a particular religion, the religion is presented as the authority.
When a person submits to that authority, that is what is known as a right-hand path. When a person refuses to submit to the authority and operates in defiance, this is what is known as a left-hand path.
The terms are derived from India iirc, based on the rotation of the sun and which direction one turns when facing north. A person who takes the right hand path will spend their days in the sun and the night in darkness and slumber, constantly facing the rising sun. A person who takes the left hand path will spend half their days and half their nights under the sun and in darkness, as their contrary direction stacks with the sun's rotation, and will constantly be oriented toward the setting sun.
Less figuratively, the right hand path (Abrahamic traditions, not exclusovely) impress the idea of the infallibility and absolute authority of God, and the absolute necessity of submission to God. Left hand path traditions (Norse, being a particularly good example) are all about defying the dictates of God or Gods, insisting that the individual find their own satisfaction and purpose in life, refusing any imposition or control on their free will.

Lets take a look at Genesis. The right hand path sees that God was right to forbid eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and that God was just for expelling Adam and Eve for their disobedience.
The left hand path feels that God was attempting to imprison humanity in the garden of Eden, offering perpetual life (the fruit of life) in exchange for never achieving the knowledge and understanding that humanity was intended to have from ther creation. As such, the first act of defiance against this God was the first step toward humanity's emergence and sovereignty. The idea here being, humanity was intended for more than the 'protector' God would allow, and THEY were just in their defiance.
The difference in the two schools of thought - beyond having vastly different interpretations of who is who and what is what - is one of individual agency. Lhp feels the individual is right and entitled to determine their own pursuits, devotions, etc. by their own agency, in order to get closer to what is viewed as the true God. Rhp feels that unchecked human agency causes increased separation from God, leading to the ruination of man.
Rhp further asserts that morality COMES from God, and that to defy is immoral, whereas Lhp tends to assert Natural Law as a moral framework, and that the pursuit of God in defiance of dictates is how one correctly approaches God.

>>165474
>>165473
>you're surprised?
Certainly not. Sociopath & Proud
>>165476
>RHP n' LHP
I don't feel like using your bread for something that's basically just concerning myself. But I would appreciate if you were to follow me.
>>>/ub/5854 →

Bumping with some very good questions about Tartaria.