Jump to content

Legosi (Tani Coyote)

SSMB Moderator
  • Content Count

    12,121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Legosi (Tani Coyote)

  1. Indeed, it'll get nice and confusing keeping these two anime separate. Particularly since with this one, they're outright saying it takes place after the most recent arc in both Super and Heroes.
  2. The topic has "untagged spoilers" for a reason. It's Super Dragon Ball Heroes so who knows, they do all kinds of time and reality warping stuff to bring everyone together in crossover stuff. Though I'd assume this plays into how the villains would even be able to contemplate killing the Omni-King; they must have some ability to bypass Erase. If so, that gives them the power they need to actually threaten him. Zen-oh wouldn't know where to begin with defending himself if he couldn't just blink someone out of existence.
  3. Wonder how Super Dragon Ball Heroes' Multiverse War arc will go. Though it's inevitable it'll probably just be a Universe 6, 7 and 11 thing. So basically the Tournament getting repeated. They better give some love to Universe 8 or something to keep it fresh.

    1. Legosi (Tani Coyote)

      Legosi (Tani Coyote)

      And yes, of Universes 1, 12, 5 and 8 it's obvious why I'm most interested in 8.

      I have a very one-track mind.

  4. Looks like for the Dragon Ball Heroes anime, the next storyline is called "Dawn of War" and involves a conflict that ravages the whole multiverse as the new bad guys try to murder the Omni-King. Also hey Zamasu comes back for it. We might get an answer on whether Zen-oh is invulnerable or not from this. Everyone just assumes he is because of the Erase power, but it needs to be remembered he's not using energy the same way as everyone else. His power is on a whole other level. It's entirely possible he could be easily killed, but no one has tried it because he can end you with zero effort. Those bodyguards make more sense if you don't think of his Erase power as flowing from a power level, but just being a special ability. In the original, the subs translated it as "uhhh, nobody besides us!" Needless to say, Basil's English rendition is hilarious by comparison since it's so dumb.
  5. From my understanding, Trump refusing to sign any spending bill that doesn't include the money for the wall. While the House has put the funding in, the Senate could not get enough votes in favor of it. So both Houses had to adjourn without passing a spending bill, thus shutting down the government. Unless Trump caves or a lot of Republicans flip in the House, this shutdown could very well last until the Dems take the House in January. Any bill without a wall will need two-thirds in both chambers to override his veto. There's also the usual solution to this problem: a more or less unanimous resolution to stay the course and keep spending as is until another spending bill is approved.
  6. I'm so happy they changed the lines for the dub, rather than going with the original translations. Basil's such a dork now because of it, and it makes him so much more precious to me.
  7. I'm glad they made Basil such a dork in the Funimation dub

    dorky basil.png

  8. "APATHY."
    "GREED."
    "CORRUPTION."
    "POWER."
    [Batman appears on screen] "HOPE."

  9. Rediscovered Markiplier's pro-trans Tweet today and it's still wonderful to see him voicing his opinion and most of his fans backing him on it

    1. Blacklightning

      Blacklightning

      Real talk I don't always like Mark's content but at the same time he's the only multi-million sub gaming Youtuber that doesn't seem to have a super dumb controversy attached to him

      And some part of me thinks it's just a matter of time but for the life of me I can't picture it, he's too nice for that

  10. Q: Freddy, Chica, and Bonnie's favorite food is pizza. But what does a pirate like Foxy prefer to eat?

    A: Night guARRRRRRds!

  11. Cameron's also gone. Sucks for the Leave folks, but that's the truth. If he wanted to make sure the vote was honored, he should have stayed on board. You not too recently had a general election where the Conservatives saw their seats shrink to a point they had to form a majority with a party with terrorist ties. Your democracy still has plenty of meaning with or without this referendum. You want to talk referenda, the fact the British people voted against the Government should speak for something. While Labour timidly calls for continuing to pursue Brexit in its official documents, they're arguing for Brexit Lite, where Britain keeps all the benefits of the EU but can claim it is no longer in it (lol). Possibly? Though that's not disrupting the status quo so I don't think the situation is comparable. Indeed, it isn't. In systems that do two rounds of voting for big policies, there's only a second round to change the status quo, not to keep it. It's a mechanic built to prevent rapid change. Later decisions overrule prior ones. It's the central principle of law. As for why they should honor it: Parliament has the guns, not them. If the Leave camp was that angry, they would need to voice their preference in general elections. It's not my fault the people who voted Leave will show up to a referendum but not a general election, where actual power brokers are chosen. This is a particularly acute mishap considering Parliament's decision is what matters. Nothing is binding on a sovereign parliament. If parliament displeases you, change it. If that's not enough, you draw up a new governing document abolishing parliamentary sovereignty. Whatever you do, just don't make your Constitution like ours. Changing the status quo is fundamentally different from keeping it. Particularly when there's a ton of misinformation going around. This is a false equivalence. My principle is to accept legal customs, because those are what actually structure our societies. The British constitution has firmly established parliamentary sovereignty. If the Leave camp are angry at the fact parliamentary sovereignty, a system they would accept in any other situation, does not serve their whims... am I the one is unprincipled, or are they? I absolutely loathe Donald Trump. I despise the Electoral College. I still accept that, under the terms of our governing documents, he is the President of the United States and has the constitutional powers that come with it.
  12. >sees headline about Trump Foundation being forced to dissolve due to a lawsuit

    >immediately starts humming the track that plays when Zen-Oh wipes out universes

  13. That would actually be consistent with the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy; nothing is final, and nothing can bind Parliament. Technically Parliament can invalidate whatever it so pleases. The only restriction on it is custom. The referendum was non-binding, and it will always be non-binding unless the UK gets rid of parliamentary sovereignty. Considering the British state has not done away with voting rights, free speech, and all that good stuff despite a technical power to do so, I don't think it follows that not honoring a referendum will lead to anything nasty. The British Constitution has subtle brilliance in that, recognizing all constitutions only have power because people agree they have power, it avoids being hard to change. If the UK public wished to call for another vote on the referendum, it is absolutely valid to call another one. I would note this is a principle enshrined in constitutions around the world, that referenda, constitutional amendments, etc. are not valid unless they are approved in two separate votes. This is a recognition of how many factors can influence a vote immediately preceding the vote, so having two votes mitigates this risk. Consider how many close elections possibly would have changed with a do-over; indeed, a lot of referendum questions have failed on their second try. If anything, multiple votes honors democracy, because it gives the public multiple chances to voice their opinion, ensuring the final course of action is the right one. Now sure, one could go the rugged individualist approach and put the burden on the masses to get the decision right the first time but... that runs contrary to how very flawed a lot of human beings are. When it comes to managing a state, it seems a good idea to build in protections against popular miscalculations. And if not honoring the referendum is that big of a deal? Politicians can be voted out. Democracy is not dead until the masses lose the power of altering the legislature.
  14. https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/12/politics/nancy-pelosi-votes-deal-democrats/index.html Pelosi has agreed to serve only one or two more terms. To win the second term, she has agreed she would need the support of two-thirds of the Democratic caucus. This is part of a deal to get her critics to back her; the party rules will be changed for party leaders can only serve 3 terms, with every term afterward requiring a two-thirds vote. When Pelosi last had her serious challenge, she just barely clinched two-thirds. Also note prominent Dem Hoyer's opinion on the matter; he says term limits are awful and has supported repealing term limits on the Presidency. You know, the institution that has the most potential to become autocratic. Cognitive biases are part of life. You cannot help but form them. Having civil rights legislation compels us to try and overcome those biases. Without it, a lot of people will fall back on them. Civil rights laws overcome the huge collective action problem of people supporting equity in the abstract but being wishy washy about it in person. Never mind the fact civil rights laws provide for a healthier economy. They furnish every company with a larger customer and employee base, which makes everyone better off in the long run. There's a reason most businesses have embraced civil rights despite their reputation of being hopelessly conservative. Plus, some people are downright malicious with their prejudices. Civil rights laws protect against those people too. Some coercion is necessary to have a healthy society. Imagine how many projects would never have been built if the state did not force people to cough up taxes to pay for it. In the abstract, everyone shouts "I would pay for that road!" but, surprise surprise, just about every social scientist worth their salt says no, most people would not do this. With regards to personal choice, any public transaction quite likely no longer qualifies as personal. When your store bans black people from shopping there, you are forcing them into other stores that may have goods of lesser quality or be more expensive. You can't claim "muh property rights" when exercising those rights clearly has a negative effect on other people. We settled the separate but equal debate in Brown. In absence of civil rights laws, bad things will crop up again.
  15. Headcanon: the Henry from Bendy and the Ink Machine and FNAF are the same person. They have a bad habit of forming business partnerships with psychos.

  16. I do hope next time I see Pepper Coyote perform I actually know the lyrics to his songs

  17.  

    Well I went to Run, Definitely Run!'s concert and the singer confirmed they made this song with furries in mind.

  18. My understanding would be that in the time between his "explosion" and the dust clearing, he buried himself under a rock.
  19. I always thought of it as Kid Buu was pure evil, then absorbed the Kais and became Fat Buu. When Fat Buu split into Good and Evil, the Good would basically have been primarily the power of the Kais. So Fat Buu is basically still the Kais, but with them having been part of Buu for so long, they've become inseparable. It's one of those questions that kind of messes with a sense of what it means to be you. Good Buu presumably would have all the memories from the days of Kid Buu, as well as that of the Kais. But he does not consider himself to be either Kai. It's a common question raised with any fusion: the character is both at the same time yet somehow neither. https://www.viz.com/shonenjump/dragon-ball-super-chapter-42/chapter/16035?action=read Chapter 42 is up in English. This time around, it turns out Frieza and 17 discussed the final victory well in advance, with 17 having agreed to fake his death and Frieza having plans to hang back so he could deliver the final blow. He says it's because he prefers strategy to just brawling, even if he would have preferred to be the final survivor. Some humor when 17 gives some further explanation of the plan: since he doesn't have a ki signature, he could hide without anyone knowing. When Krillin mentions he was positive 17 self-destructed, 17 not only laughs the idea off, but says he lost the ability to do that long ago. Krillin is "huh?" to it and 17's just "...you're the one who wished for it, remember?" Change from the anime: Grand Priest announces Universe 7 has had its mortal ranking raised to third from the bottom due to the universe-restoring wish. So mortal level factors in the morality of a universe as much as its strength or economic development.
  20. In all honesty, considering the Dems won't be able to pass anything for two years anyway, this would be a fantastic time to can her so someone else could start learning the ropes. I don't trust Pelosi to retire, honestly. Someone who has stayed on that long has no intent of leaving without a fight. She is no George Washington. Even Harry Reid was content to leave the Senate leadership (and Senate in general) after 12 years. Pelosi is pushing 16 years as leader and has been in office for over 30 years. If Dems get behind her, they need to emphasize she will get two more years, and that is it. If she's unhappy with that arrangement, well, she just exposed what she really cares about. The good news is as a 78-year old she's probably not going to have much choice about how long she stays in. I just hope House Democrats start getting some young blood sooner rather than later because otherwise we're looking at a serious leadership crisis in a few years.
  21. I'm so sad A Twisted Awakening got put on hiatus. It was the first quality FNAF fangame that would feature Twisted Wolf as an enemy.

  22. That's the thing about all this, though - while there's no clear alternative, they do have the votes to deny her the Speakership outright if they so choose. The assumption is the strategy is to force her to step aside when it's obvious she can't get the votes; this would level the playing field and allow numerous candidates to come in and try to drum up support. Basically, they're trying to get rid of the House equivalent of Clinton. Once the monolithic candidate is out of the way, lots of alternatives would be possible. While she is competent, I have no doubt there are other Dems who would be as well. Plus, in the spirit of democracy and turnover here, she has to go. 16 years in a serious position of power? No. Go away. I don't care who you are. Party leadership is something that should absolutely change hands. If she is given power, any power, it should be on the condition she leaves no matter what in 2021. She has to go. The only other Democrat with her level of tenure was Sam Rayburn, and he served in a less polarized time where the committees held a lot more power, so it was more symbolic that he was party leader. Pelosi is overseeing a time of polarization and immense power in the Speakership, so she should not be allowed to stay in it for too long.
  23. Why do I have the strangest feeling this ram guy is going to pull a King Piccolo and get his youth restored and then be a legitimate threat?
  24. 2 AM, Wednesday. One week from today, I'll be boarding a bus to head to the airport for Midwest FurFest!

  25. GE's Sonic plush line is back in business!

    1. Kiah

      Kiah

      There goes my money!

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.