Help
As if Facebook weren't entertaining enough... 1) Scroll to the bottom of your Facebook page. 2) On the bottom left corner, click English: US. 3) When the language selection appears, click English: Pirate
Arr Pirate Facebook me hearties
#1
- Dissonant
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 2,108
- Joined: 14-May 01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Neverwhere
Posted 20 November 2009 - 09:11 AM
MultiQuote
#2
- I am a kitten =^.^= (formerly 3vil L337)
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 2,181
- Joined: 17-December 04
- Gender:Male
- Location:That great American plain of funtionalist salvation
Posted 20 November 2009 - 10:14 AM
I been on that s### for ages. Top Quality.
[1:50] anti: " Don't forget the sunglasses, its like a gun on your face"
/Fiesta Grande\
/Fiesta Grande\
#3
- Amor Vincit Omnia
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5,215
- Joined: 02-August 03
- Gender:Male
- Location:Nottingham, UK
Posted 20 November 2009 - 05:07 PM
Get with the times, man! That s### is years old...
"My friends tell me that I refuse to grow up, but I know they're just jealous because they don't have pajamas with feet."
-- Tom Sims
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
-- Tom Sims
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
#4
- Brick s###house
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,969
- Joined: 23-December 07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rickton's basement
Posted 20 November 2009 - 06:31 PM
I don't think I'll ever go back to "regular" English.
Except when uploading photos. One of the buttons won't show up when I'm using the Pirate language.
Except when uploading photos. One of the buttons won't show up when I'm using the Pirate language.
><>
I shat a bottle of rope.
I shat a bottle of rope.
#5
- Dissonant
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 2,108
- Joined: 14-May 01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Neverwhere
Posted 24 November 2009 - 07:55 AM
Arrwtf?
#7
- Deadpan Orator
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 13,878
- Joined: 03-August 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:DC
Posted 26 November 2009 - 02:35 AM
I wouldn't have bet that they allowed Songemots onto facebook.
-Pufer
-Pufer
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha
#9
- Formerly "Destroyer E"
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 6,974
- Joined: 26-March 03
- Gender:Male
- Location:Sirgil III
Posted 01 December 2009 - 05:24 PM
Yeah, old news. The new cool thing to do is to use English (UK).
facebook.com/cippy
twitter.com/cippy
gplus.to/cippy
last.fm/user/cippy
Official Pufervian
Messing with Cippy's sig because I can. -mrxak
twitter.com/cippy
gplus.to/cippy
last.fm/user/cippy
Official Pufervian
Messing with Cippy's sig because I can. -mrxak
#10
- Brick s###house
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,969
- Joined: 23-December 07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rickton's basement
Posted 01 December 2009 - 09:44 PM
I wouldn't have bet that they allowed Songemots onto facebook.
-Pufer
-Pufer
Of course they do. Anything else would be DISCRIMINATION.
><>
I shat a bottle of rope.
I shat a bottle of rope.
#11
- Guilty Light
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4,587
- Joined: 23-April 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:In the dark, holding a candle
Posted 02 December 2009 - 07:29 PM
Of course they do. Anything else would be DISCRIMINATION.
I, uh...I don't think discrimination laws apply to sponges. Even coverage for Toms is a little iffy...
"This world is set to break me"
@-/--
{A broken life is not a broken soul}
@-/--
{A broken life is not a broken soul}
#12
- Brick s###house
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,969
- Joined: 23-December 07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rickton's basement
Posted 02 December 2009 - 11:03 PM
I, uh...I don't think discrimination laws apply to sponges. Even coverage for Toms is a little iffy...
Here. Read the last fact in the list.
><>
I shat a bottle of rope.
I shat a bottle of rope.
#14
- Deadpan Orator
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 13,878
- Joined: 03-August 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:DC
Posted 04 December 2009 - 03:39 AM
Unfortunately, that's been overturned by the Supreme Court. Chief Justice Roberts led off oral arguments with the statement, "###### sponges!" This led to some contention as a couple Justices apparently were convinced by this statement that the case involved ###### sponges, sold under the name "Today Sponge" - contraceptive sponges reintroduced to the US market in 2005.
After some discussion, it was settled that the Court was, in fact, hearing a case involving sponges that are not ###### sponges, and that they were excepted from the statute at issue in the present case. After that was settled, the Court unprecedentedly retired immediately to chambers and pounded out the Court's decision, issuing it within a couple hours.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, noted that not only should sponges not be provided any rights, they should be shot on sight by law enforcement officials as vermin.
Justice Stevens wrote a concurring opinion, which was joined by Justices Scalia and Ginsberg, making special note that he joined only insofar as the opinion is inapplicable to ###### sponges.
Justice Thomas concurred and dissented from the judgment of the Court in an opinion in which he denied that the Constitution can be read to allow any anti-discrimination laws at all, decried the fact that humans should be allowed to freely wander the Earth, and then criticized the Majority's unwillingness to include ###### sponges in its holding before going into a sixteen page rambling diatribe about the younger generations noting that, "kids these days are having too much sex, what with their free love and long hair and disrespect for their elders and the educational system" and "back in my day, if you so much as looked at an adult sideways, you'd be whupped with a switch and your eyes would be gouged out and fed to the Polish."
-Pufer
After some discussion, it was settled that the Court was, in fact, hearing a case involving sponges that are not ###### sponges, and that they were excepted from the statute at issue in the present case. After that was settled, the Court unprecedentedly retired immediately to chambers and pounded out the Court's decision, issuing it within a couple hours.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, noted that not only should sponges not be provided any rights, they should be shot on sight by law enforcement officials as vermin.
Justice Stevens wrote a concurring opinion, which was joined by Justices Scalia and Ginsberg, making special note that he joined only insofar as the opinion is inapplicable to ###### sponges.
Justice Thomas concurred and dissented from the judgment of the Court in an opinion in which he denied that the Constitution can be read to allow any anti-discrimination laws at all, decried the fact that humans should be allowed to freely wander the Earth, and then criticized the Majority's unwillingness to include ###### sponges in its holding before going into a sixteen page rambling diatribe about the younger generations noting that, "kids these days are having too much sex, what with their free love and long hair and disrespect for their elders and the educational system" and "back in my day, if you so much as looked at an adult sideways, you'd be whupped with a switch and your eyes would be gouged out and fed to the Polish."
-Pufer
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha
#16
- Brick s###house
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,969
- Joined: 23-December 07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rickton's basement
Posted 04 December 2009 - 06:35 PM
Unfortunately, that's been overturned by the Supreme Court. Chief Justice Roberts led off oral arguments with the statement, "###### sponges!" This led to some contention as a couple Justices apparently were convinced by this statement that the case involved ###### sponges, sold under the name "Today Sponge" - contraceptive sponges reintroduced to the US market in 2005.
After some discussion, it was settled that the Court was, in fact, hearing a case involving sponges that are not ###### sponges, and that they were excepted from the statute at issue in the present case. After that was settled, the Court unprecedentedly retired immediately to chambers and pounded out the Court's decision, issuing it within a couple hours.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, noted that not only should sponges not be provided any rights, they should be shot on sight by law enforcement officials as vermin.
Justice Stevens wrote a concurring opinion, which was joined by Justices Scalia and Ginsberg, making special note that he joined only insofar as the opinion is inapplicable to ###### sponges.
Justice Thomas concurred and dissented from the judgment of the Court in an opinion in which he denied that the Constitution can be read to allow any anti-discrimination laws at all, decried the fact that humans should be allowed to freely wander the Earth, and then criticized the Majority's unwillingness to include ###### sponges in its holding before going into a sixteen page rambling diatribe about the younger generations noting that, "kids these days are having too much sex, what with their free love and long hair and disrespect for their elders and the educational system" and "back in my day, if you so much as looked at an adult sideways, you'd be whupped with a switch and your eyes would be gouged out and fed to the Polish."
-Pufer
After some discussion, it was settled that the Court was, in fact, hearing a case involving sponges that are not ###### sponges, and that they were excepted from the statute at issue in the present case. After that was settled, the Court unprecedentedly retired immediately to chambers and pounded out the Court's decision, issuing it within a couple hours.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, noted that not only should sponges not be provided any rights, they should be shot on sight by law enforcement officials as vermin.
Justice Stevens wrote a concurring opinion, which was joined by Justices Scalia and Ginsberg, making special note that he joined only insofar as the opinion is inapplicable to ###### sponges.
Justice Thomas concurred and dissented from the judgment of the Court in an opinion in which he denied that the Constitution can be read to allow any anti-discrimination laws at all, decried the fact that humans should be allowed to freely wander the Earth, and then criticized the Majority's unwillingness to include ###### sponges in its holding before going into a sixteen page rambling diatribe about the younger generations noting that, "kids these days are having too much sex, what with their free love and long hair and disrespect for their elders and the educational system" and "back in my day, if you so much as looked at an adult sideways, you'd be whupped with a switch and your eyes would be gouged out and fed to the Polish."
-Pufer
Source?
><>
I shat a bottle of rope.
I shat a bottle of rope.
#17
- Deadpan Orator
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 13,878
- Joined: 03-August 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:DC
Posted 05 December 2009 - 01:41 AM
54 F.R.D. 282
-Pufer
-Pufer
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha
#19
- Guilty Light
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4,587
- Joined: 23-April 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:In the dark, holding a candle
Posted 05 December 2009 - 11:09 PM
EVERYtHING
This post has been edited by GutlessWonder: 05 December 2009 - 11:09 PM
"This world is set to break me"
@-/--
{A broken life is not a broken soul}
@-/--
{A broken life is not a broken soul}
#20
- Deadpan Orator
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 13,878
- Joined: 03-August 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:DC
Posted 06 December 2009 - 01:56 AM
Oh, my bad. The correct citation is 520 F.3d 976.
-Pufer
-Pufer
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha
#22
- Deadpan Orator
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 13,878
- Joined: 03-August 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:DC
Posted 06 December 2009 - 10:43 PM
You sure? I mean, how could U.S. v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins not have vast repercussions for sponges?
How about 557 U.S. ___ (2009) then? New case, so not published yet.
-Pufer
How about 557 U.S. ___ (2009) then? New case, so not published yet.
-Pufer
This post has been edited by Pufer: 07 December 2009 - 11:36 PM
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha
#24
- Deadpan Orator
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 13,878
- Joined: 03-August 02
- Gender:Male
- Location:DC
Posted 07 December 2009 - 12:12 AM
Have to wait for them to publish it for the source. 
-Pufer
-Pufer
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who said it, even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha
#25
- Brick s###house
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,969
- Joined: 23-December 07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rickton's basement
Posted 07 December 2009 - 07:50 PM
Have to wait for them to publish it for the source.
-Pufer
-Pufer
I'm more than a little dubious as to the veracity of this claim. Can you provide any statistics backing it up?
><>
I shat a bottle of rope.
I shat a bottle of rope.
