Askance, what the holy fuck is wrong with you?

See here.

I have plenty of substance to come back with, you douchebag, but it’s Cafe Society, not Great fucking Debates. I’m not trying to “win.” I asked if you’d read the thread because everything you said had already been addressed, not because I wanted to score points in some juvenile contest that you seem to be running in your tiny head. I wrote my posts because I was participating in a friendly discussion about a great movie. If you aren’t interested in that, then what the fuck are you doing in that thread?

Seriously, what is wrong with you? Are you drunk? If so, get some help, because alcohol clearly doesn’t agree with you. You’re acting like some bad comedic impression of an obnoxious, antisocial teenager who thinks “How are you?” is an excuse to start a fight.

Yawn That’s a movie I’ve seen too many times, and I’m not interested. Go swing your dick at someone else. I got nothing to prove, and I’m afraid you’re just too sad to be be funny.


So - to be clear: **askance **is trying to convince you/explain to you that there is NO WAY Deckard could be a replicant?

If so, then :rolleyes::smiley:

To be a fan of the movie and book is to know that, regardless of which opinion or preference you hold, this is a topic of huge discussion related to DADOES and BR - and the film’s long history of edits which lean it one way or the other.

In other words - askance, what the holy fuck is wrong with you?


He seems to be arguing both sides of the aisle, judging by the last quote. But I could be confused. Isn’t he saying that Deckard was a human identical replicant, but not a blade runner?

Everybody in Gone With the Wind is an undercover Union spy!

Can you prove me wrong? Huh? Huh?

I suggest you break out the Charmin-tube lightsabers used in the climactic “Han/Greedo Shot First!” debate and get this thing settled quickly, so you can move on to weightier matters like whether or not Leo’s top falls over (and like, so what if it did?).

We should make a list of Cafe Society topics that, while relatively minor, are guaranteed to drive certain types of people into crazed fits of anger and snark that you usually see reserved for arguments about religion and politics.

Of the top of my head:
-Deckerd, replicant?
-Starship Troopers a good movie?
-PC’s rule, consoles drool

His name is DeckArd! DeckArd!


God, that debate looks almost as boring as the movie was.

What the holy fuck is wrong with you?

It’s been four years!!

Deckerd [sic] is a human, but the question is interesting to think about.
Starship Troopers is a good movie, so long as you check your brain at the door and don’t spend any time comparing it to the novel.
PCs suck; Macs rule.

Glad I could help clear that up for ya! Now let’s move back to the astronaut v. caveman discussion – I haven’t done that one in a while! :smiley:

Cavemen would probably win a hand to hand fight, astronauts would probably be better at landing the space shuttle.

No, the astronauts would be able to freak out the cavemen with a simple moonwalk. Is he going backwards or forwards? Where do I aim my pointy stick? Psychology is nine tenths of the battle.

(I refuse to believe NASA doesn’t train their astronauts to moonwalk).

Oh, and seconded.

One caveman would totally take apart one astronaut, but a group of astronauts would probably coordinate better.

I agree, askance seems to have totally overreacted. I will be commenting on his misunderstandings in the other thread.

As I said in the thread, when you are arguing for your own view using the wankiest faux deep argument possible, while mocking your opponents view for being wanky and deep, you has lost it. You need to step away from the computer and go outside for a few minutes and take some deep breaths.

nerd fight!!!

Wouldn’t the astronauts stay with a caveman family until they were able to fix their space capsule and return to their own time?