Lurker > Corrik7

I hope that wasn't stated as a slight towards me, Eddv. = (

That said, I am assuming u are going to email us the details for how this specifically will work?


---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

https://enepieng.wordpress.com/2012/08/27/what-really-happened-to-vesna-vulovic/

Vesna Vulovic reportedly became a celebrity when she survived a plane crash from 33,300 feet. Become a Guinness Record holder in the process.

However, some claim she did not fall that far due to a Czechoslovakia cover up and accidental shooting of the commerical liner.

Vesna experienced amnesia and never remembered the ordeal despite her otherwise pretty close to full recovery.

Thoughts?

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

That's a lot of players.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

"The Monmouth University Poll was conducted by telephone from August 16 to 20, 2019 with 800 adults in the United States. Results in this release are based on 298 registered voters who identify as Democrats or lean toward the Democratic Party, which has a +/- 5.7 percentage point sampling margin of error. The poll was conducted by the Monmouth University Polling Institute in West Long Branch, NJ."

I figured as much that this was likely Dems they were polling. States with open primaries Biden is gonna smash. He is appealing to independents and moderate Republicans probably moreso than liberals at this point. He is basically wooing the middle while taking the left for granted.

The far left are more likely to support Bernie or Warren than Biden. This is why Biden always crushes the Trump theoretical matchup polls vs them. He isn't wooing the same voters. He knows those are for granted vs Trump.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Marvel Legends toys?

I doubt it tho cuz they could just sell them on eBay for a bigger profit.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

HentaiMan posted...

Why?

Cuz it looked like it was her face all messed up

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Damn Monmouth credibility must be sad.

Warren vs Trump is a republican dream.

Sanders and Biden prolly beat him.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

The watermark on the last picture freaked me out at first.

That said, it is terrible and sad.

I do question whether the people here in question were just too dumb to understand the gravity of things based on the article though.

Not an excuse. Just an observation.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

turbopuns3 posted...

It's exactly 7 players so first come first served I guess.

1. Lea
2. MI
3. IGCD
4.
5
6.
7.

In for non live

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik, your partner is basically a single-issue voter about abortion, right?

does she think Dems are evil?

No. She thinks you need the Lord in your life to understand what you are doing is wrong and may God forgive your sins. Lol

But I am evil for watching horror movies.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Oh ur draft is over haha lol

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Nanahara715 posted...

I need, uh, 1 guy for a NFL Board fantasy league (10 team, HPPR Superflex).

@Corrik7
@azuarc

If interested since you're leaving this one? We are drafting in.... one hour...

I'll play. I was being nice dropping out as a charter member of the other league.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

this topic isnt exactly a representative sample of America. Obviously its been more in the reverse because theres only like four conservatives posting here.

And not a single one has said Democrats are evil. Yet, I'd say probably half of you if not more have argued in the reverse right? Are you saying our small sample size of evil conservatives with no empathy for human life is the difference? Lol

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Victim complexes up in here. How many times have the Democrats are evil been argued here by conservatives? Now how many times in reverse. Come on, now.

Just because some religious nuts think you are baby killers doesn't go past the general labels pasted by the Dems on Republicans in general.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Good. More challengers the better.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

I think it would apply, but it is flimsy.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/world/asia/hong-kong-protests.html

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

azuarc posted...

The only person I can remember sharing it with is Drakeryn.

I read it and gave you feed back. Rude.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Has everyone here read azu's book?

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

Go lock up some children for months Corrik. You literally cant talk a line when you are over the "Extreme disregard for basic human decency line".

Nice try.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

TheRock1525 posted...

The irony.

I know. Defender of Antifa becoming what they supposedly are defending against!



Just kidding, Inviso.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Espeon posted...

Given Californias gay marriage vote in 2008, Brexit, and Trump, Im really questioning why democracy is considered so damn wonderful.

Democracy can't only be wonderful when you get your own way. Tiptoeing perilously along the fascism line!

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

To last topic, I always find it funny when people are not posting in "good faith" when they do not agree with you. It is an egotistical argument. You are saying that you cannot possibly be wrong and unless they eventually upon debating see your side as correct that they weren't arguing in good faith.



---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

azuarc posted...

I am willing to step aside if it will allow the league to run at 14. I'm not super excited to participate. FF just becomes part of my routine during the fall where I fanatically check my team every week and ultimately probably make bad decisions. I'm also not sure that the draft time won't fall uncomfortably for me this year. (Can you give a draft order to Yahoo that makes it NOT pick a kicker or DST the instant you have the other positions filled?)

I will too. 16 doesn't seem very fun tbqh. 14 was crazy big as it was. I'll step out.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Nanahara715 posted...

Gurley was the number 1 overall pick, Hunt was like 6th, and Conner was a free agent pickup, so a) your league was ridiculous for letting Hunt fall back to you or for trading him to you when you're already crushing RBs and b) Conner was a waiver guy so he was fair game and c) this is a 2 RB start league (I'm assuming) so it doesn't compare to a 1 RB/2 WR/2 Flex league, for the same reason you can't starve a league of QBs in a 1 QB league.

It was a 2 RB/Flex league. I started 3 RBs every week. And if I had multiple openings on my roster and would have had to drop a RB to fill it, I just left kicker unfilled to fill it. I dominated the league.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Nanahara715 posted...

Gurley was the number 1 overall pick, Hunt was like 6th, and Conner was a free agent pickup, so a) your league was ridiculous for letting Hunt fall back to you or for trading him to you when you're already crushing RBs and b) Conner was a waiver guy so he was fair game and c) this is a 2 RB start league (I'm assuming) so it doesn't compare to a 1 RB/2 WR/2 Flex league, for the same reason you can't starve a league of QBs in a 1 QB league.

I drafted Gurley, Hunt, Drake 1-2-3. Connor was my last round pick.

I picked 2 RBs in between.

Yes, Hunt falling to me was a gift tho.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Nanahara715 posted...

Like, you're not drafting Mohammad Sanu (WR30 last year) over Chris Carson (RB15), you're picking between Carson and like Tyler Boyd.

You worry too much about the comparison of Wrs more than how ur hurting the other teams.

Difference in WRs gets pretty negligible when in the middle of the pack. Same reason why drafting QBs early is a fools errand. You can get a top QB in like round 15.

I win a lot more leagues drafting RB-RB-RB then drafting any other combination. Because that starves the other teams too much and causes issues. Granted at 16 by time u draft twice it's a shit show with players left anyways.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Nanahara715 posted...

I mean, this is just wrong, but I don't know how to explain it to you.

At some point, Team drafts RB 15 instead of [comparable WR]. [Comprable WR] scores more than RB15. If you have two flex, you'd rather have WR 15 than RB 15, and if you load up on RBs, you don't end up with WRs that are worth more.

Yeah, RBs 1-14 are worth the most, but you aren't going to end up starting 3 of them. With 1 RB requirement and 3 flex, it makes the most sense for a team to draft a RB workhorse in the first/second then load up on WR talent for the rest of the draft. You really only need 2 reasonable RBs.

I like how you are literally saying you aren't gonna do something I regularly do lol.

I literally rode Gurley, Hunt, Connor to the championship in my money league last year and had 3 RBs on my bench just to starve the league of viable competition. Lol

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Nanahara715 posted...

No, because once you get past the first, like, 12 RBs, WRs will take over. 3 RBs is only the best if you have 3 workhorse dudes (which you won't get in a 16 team league). The RB1 will outscore the WR1, but once you get to the RB 12, they're being outscored by the WR12, all the way down- WR30 definitely outscores RB30 (which is why people are coveting RB up front)

It is not about getting the best. It's about starving the league of competition.

You have to compare WR30 to RB 15. And RB15 probably wins in most ppr leagues.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

The best option for max fun is to split the league into two. Then a final week after the championship manually adding scores from the two champs to see who woulda been the grand champ.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Reg posted...

The more I think about it, the more I agree. Though I always found the idea of a WR/TE slot in particular a bit silly, but mostly I like the idea of streaming TEs, picking matchups etc as an alternative to spending heavy draft capital on Kelce/Kittle/Ertz

Something like (QB or Superflex)/RB/WR/TE/Flex/Flex/K/DST with 4 bench (+IR?) sounds good though.

This supports drafting 4 or 5 RBs in your first picks. 3 RBs is your best lineup and it starves the rest of the league of RBs.

That is why I said 1 RB and 1 flex makes most sense in a 16.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

LiquidOshawott posted...

No IDPs makes missing the draft easier tbh, since yahoo is too dumb to rank them and you get randos while people who attend get the elite LBs and DEs etc

I can get with that

Everyone saying no to IDPs due to draft reasonings... The best idps are hardly ever drafted. The best ones are always the one who have the most tackles at the end of the year. Most people draft fantasy bums like JJ Watt and shit cuz they think name recognition means something for that in fantasy.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

it has been used as a basis to grant asylum under the social group criteria

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

Interesting. It should be on there anyways. There are countries and such that can be very oppressive to those based on that.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Also, sexual orientation should definitely be on the list of asylum reasons. Weird it isn't.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

also missed this one

no its not. if theyre legitimately seeking asylum presumably the situation would be even worse for the kids if they didnt leave their country.

If parents feel their children separated from them in holding facilities indefinitely until their cases are resolved is a net plus for their children, then who are we to argue with them.

*Rolls eyes*

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

Specifically the basis for rejecting someone based on being in another country before the US is

the applicant has been firmly resettled in another country prior to arriving in the United States

passing through a country while traveling is not firmly resettling.

That just simply is broken. This is something Hungary gets completely right in their elimination of illegal immigration.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

If someone is from Guatemala and fears persecution there, then they enter Mexico, that doesnt make them no longer fear persecution were they to return to Guatemala and Mexico doesnt suddenly become their home just because they walked into it. The first criteria as it is currently worded absolutely still applies.

Then you need to either show proof Mexico denied your asylum or that Mexico is now the country you are applying from asylum from with proof. Which you unlikely are unable to prove without any significant time period there.

Asylum seekers going through other countries are simply immigrants. Usually economic immigrants. There is a legal process for immigration. You can't jump the line by claiming asylum which is obviously untrue if going through other countries where you could have your asylum granted. Especially, should be failed if you didn't even try there.

Only way crossing through countries should be allowed for asylum is if you applied from your home country and awaited approval before coming.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

Asylum has two basic requirements. First, an asylum applicant must establish that he or she fears persecution from their Government in their home country.[5] Second, the applicant must prove that he or she would be persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or particular social group.[6]

weird I dont see must not have traveled through more than one country on the list

Once you left your country and went into another one, you accomplished the first one no longer being applicable. Thus, you fail the asylum requirements. The second likely no longer applies anymore either.

Asylum is we have to get out, not let's choose where we want to go.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

the kids are one component of a larger issue, obviously more things matter than just that and a solution to the kids thing that fucks up a bunch of other things isnt a good solution. Its all a priority, the cage kids are just the most egregious part of the situation.

The most egregious part is the parents who put their kids in this situation. We cannot control the parents doing this. However, we can fix the system to prevent the parents from doing this to their young ones without weakening our borders and destroying our own immigration systems.

It is just as much tantamount to protecting our sovereignty and borders for the US citizens as it is to be concerned about non-US citizen children that their parents are purposely putting into bad situations.

We have as much a responsibility to our citizens and our borders as we do to the children involved here.

There are solutions to equally protect both from the actions of the parents causing these issues.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

To be honest, all asylum seekers should be from relatively adjacent countries or have applied from their home countries first. Let's not forget what asylum is supposed to actually be.

It is not supposed to be a "hey, let's move to where we can hopefully do best.". That is immigration.

It is "We have to get out of here and go anywhere at all that will take us to get away from this country".

There is being a misapplication of asylum going on here, and it should be streamlined to easily deny asylum when it is obviously not valid.


---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

LordoftheMorons posted...

1. Do you think all people facing trial should be remanded?
2. Seeking asylum is legal. Do you agree that, at minimum, asylum seekers shouldn't be locked up?

I believe everyone who is not a US citizen facing trial should be remanded. Yes.

Asylum seekers should be automatically denied if going through a third country because they were not actually seeking asylum but a specific destination.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

thats not true when both sides have opposing ideas of what constitutes a solution or what the problem even is

If the "kids" are what was the utmost priority, a compromise plan would have alrdy happened. It isn't though. Both sides just want their way. Which means the kids are not the utmost priority to the government.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

LordoftheMorons posted...

There's another option: release both the parents and kids pending trial (unless there's a good reason not to do so for the particular person in question). Given that the alternative is locking up kids, it's a pretty damn appealing option! (It was also the norm prior to Trump).

It isn't an appealing option. They disappear and have no incentive to return. It is a complete unworkable solution because it is a loophole to gain admission into the United States illegally.

This works if they are released into a third country. It doesn't work by releasing them into your own they are trying to enter, many illegally.

This is why the refusal to support the third country option is just silly by liberals. It is like all your options have to be supporting illegal immigration to "help the kids".

Agree to ideas that keep a priority on not allowing illegal immigration. They exist. Many of them.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

Again, we are saying you are ok with children being held indefinitely.

The fact is simply disgusting. I am still sorry people like you exist.

Everyone is saying to fix the system. You are arguing the system is bettered by holding children for a limitless period of time.

It is quite sad. But we know what kind of human being you are. It is unfortunate.

No. You are again making things up.

Democrats are simply crying about Trump instead of crying to actually fixing the system with a bipartisan plan.

That is your problem.

You act like acting you are morally superior is an argument that isn't laughable. You want to complain about a system, but I don't see you complaining about Democrats refusing to work together to make a bipartisan solution to it.

Typical partisan political arguments as usual. Just something to use politically as a pawn.

If both sides actually wanted a solution to the problem, it would be done.


---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

MoogleKupo141 posted...

its both... you dont know how long it will be because they havent placed a limit on it

He is implying it means possibly forever. It means until an unspecified time til the court case is concluded in this context. Which again can be lengthy due to the overrun system that you should be screaming to fix.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

Would be a hell of a world if indefinitely meant what you seem to think it is! Lol.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/sports/ncaabasketball/grayson-allen-duke-indefinite-suspension.html

Haha.

It doesn't mean they are keeping kids forever, bro. It means until the court stuff is settled, which they don't know when that will be.

Again, you can't release non-citizen children into the United States without their parents. That would be asinine.

Maybe the only way they could swing it is to allow a citizen to agree to care for the child as the court case takes place and the parents are detained, with the caveat if the child isn't returned upon completion of the case they have committed a felony.

But, it does not solve child separation. Also, likely all the people acting like some travesty is unfolding wouldn't even be open to doing that idea anyways.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

not unknown, unlimited.

I am dying that you seriously don't know what the fuck indefinitely means. Lmfao.


---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

you literally arent arguing for any sort of legislation that speeds up the process here because none of that is up for debate. The only thing you are advocating for is for children to be held indefinitely.

Its honestly quite disgusting. I mean, we knew these things about you, but your just being more open about them now.

Its sad.

You literally just made that up.

I have over many topics stated that asylum seekers should be automatically denied if they past thru a third country on the way. That is not how asylum works.

I have over many topics stated we need to streamline the immigration court system to let them deal with cases faster.

I have over many topics said we need more judges to process cases faster.

I have over many topics said we need to have a border wall to help deter illegal crossings and require less manpower on the actual border to free up money in other places to help with the situation.

The problem is this was allowed to happen and now that the law is properly being applied, people are upset about it. (Though to be fair Democrats are only upset right now because a Republican president is in office.)

The system needs to be fixed. However, there is nothing much that can be done right now to immediately fix the issue unless you blanket allow everyone in or deny everyone as of now to get it under control to let the system recover and not continue to flounder.


---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

indefinitely
/indef()ntl/
Learn to pronounce
adverb
adverb: indefinitely

for an unlimited or unspecified period of time.

Congrats. I am glad you learned what the word means. Now apply the proper usage.

Lmfao at red thinking if players are out indefinitely that they will never play again.

It means for an unknown amount of time. Lololol... Red, you crack me up.

---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2

red13n posted...

Indefinitely.

Indefinitely can mean an hour or a week or a month or etc. It means as long as needed. Not forever.


---

Xbox Live User Name - Corrik
Currently playing: Division 2