If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
So someone sent you a creepy weeaboo fantasy. Literally.
Comments
....Huh.
That is... that is definitely a thing.
As for me, I'd probably figure out who the hell sent this person, and help this person out. Romance is icing on the cake.
Because tropers. Seriously, did you really need to ask? Just, fucking tropers, man.On the internet.
Ergo, it's acceptable.
So nearly every thread I make over there gets deleted for being a snowclone even if they have legitimate discussion going on in them, but those are all perfectly okay? Fuck that.And considering I don't have such an obsession, I consider myself in the clear.
He kicks reason to the curb and goes beyond the impossible!
He! Is! KAMINAAAA!
no question evasion, and death is not an option, or this, only this,
with no question evasion and there is no 3rd option".
That's because that is the entire point. While the two threads presented had shitty dilemmas, "taking a third option" is the worst kind of answer, it sidesteps the question and undermines the purpose of the dichotomy (usually, examining your own beliefs). Also, with few exceptions, the alternative answers are never clever.
By taking a third option you wilfully avoid addressing either of those issues, both of which are important and, were the question asked in a debate, likely relevant to the discussion.
In other words, yes, I am trying to avoid them, because I feel that at best they are idle speculation that I hope to never have to apply, and at worst someone else is trying to psychoanalyze me through my answers.
...oh the heck with this, this isn't getting anywhere.
That may well be extremely pertinent, and a person who disagrees with you is well within their rights to ask you to try and clarify what makes one life worth more or less than another, or ask you to clarify if you think all lives are exactly equal in value and death is always a bad thing in any circumstance.
By refusing to address your own thinking on the matter you are simply engaging in behaviour non-conducive to debate. If you were that certain about your stance you wouldn't have such reservations, so anyone asking you such a question only to have you dodge it, would be within their rights to assume that you have only arbitrary and illogical reasoning to back yourself up, not determined ideas of your own.