cheekychappy
CheekyChappy
cheekychappy

Io9 might know. What did 350's name turn out to be?

Could you have some sort of headline tag indicating articles solely consisting of videos? Saves me clicking on something I can’t look at (who wants to use that much data on 3G?)

And I really admire the way you decided to simply shift the conversation away from my rebuttal of your “the title is correct” point, rather than perhaps more bravely attempted to stand your corner.

Ah, the classic definition of troll “someone who disagrees with me and is prepared to say so out loud”.

You took an easy shot at a lazy stereotype, punching downwards. It’s brilliantly hypocritical to the rest of your position on this “article".

Nice work there making value judgments on people based on a single attribute, such as their occupation. I wish I could do that. Maybe with other attributes. Race, maybe.

So how are you defining “fuck” as a noun relating to a person then? My dictionary obviously doesn’t have the “correct” definition.

Also, internet fight! Fight, fight, fight!

... You have no idea how sarcasm works, right?

You’re defending the unnecessarily inflammatory title with a level of vehemence above and beyond that of the casual reader. I can see why people just guess based on how many comments you’ve written.

The context she wants is “we should never make films out of this”. That’s nonsense.

I am going to enjoy every single one of the inevitable responses to this rather incendiary piece of work.

Amusingly, he had to pick that particular pseudonym because the one he’d originally picked writes a lot of porn.

Just do it on your phone.

I am disappointed that this consists of anything other than a massive tub of green paint.

“Half of US women” isn’t a news story though. That’s basically just the democrats, since US population is pretty much divided down the middle.

It’s as if British people find it easy to write about stereotypes, just like American people love the British being evil.

Not pictured: the thousands and thousands of these notes done by authors who utterly failed.