Bittersweet Candy Bowl Forums

Stop yer bitching Klaus. This was bound to happen when she started selling them to people, so calm down. At least they didn't just flat out sue her.

Kaxbe, on 24 May 2012 - 02:42 AM, said:

I post the occasional picture and talk sometimes but there really isn't much to do in between seasons

Well I'd put more conversational material in this if I could, but like Rick says, there isn't much between seasons.

But isn't season 3 like, 13 summer eps? Not the usual 26?

Anyway, the usual dump follows.

Happy B-day Sibsy!
B-day Vid - Lasers
B-day Vid - Card
Flashity
Flashy
Flash


Comics
Fight
Human
Crackle
Bots
Pancakes
Rose-Colored
---
Sadflash
---
As soon as summer rolls around, expect me to draw a shitton of pony, so I can actually contribute some of my own material.
---
This looks really cool; "Screenwriting Contest"

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 24 May 2012 - 11:37 PM

Part Two




She's in this

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 25 May 2012 - 12:17 AM

Ace, on 24 May 2012 - 02:44 AM, said:

From what I understand if someone reports a case of someone profiting on copyright then the company has to take legal action, regardless if they care or not. If hasbro didn't act they would lose their copyright to market 'plushies' of their intellectual property in the future, I think.

You must have read the articles on Equestia daily.

You must have to, Ace.

This post has been edited by CaptainBaconMan: 25 May 2012 - 05:35 AM

Seth picks the best pictures.

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 25 May 2012 - 11:43 AM

HAAAAAAA~

Killer Chrysalis
This Day Pinkie


ZALGO ZALGO ZALGO

WhiteDove Update
GIT DAT LICENSE

Kaxbe, on 21 May 2012 - 07:27 AM, said:

Well now I'm sorry that I've been too busy to stop by for the past several days, because I am going to have to respectfully disagree, and I do wish I had done so in a more prompt manner. I was expecting a much more angry and insulting response; I though I would be perfectly justified in ignoring it, and not feel obligated to explain and defend my position.

I deeply regret the prejudices that remain in society today, but I find people who use others sympathy, no matter how much they deserve it, to justify being unreasonably offended or gaining random special privileges annoying. And while Susan has every right to say that people who contribute towards this documentary are wasting their money--everybody is certainly entitled to opinions at least that far--I firmly believe that there is no good reason to find it offensive how others throw their money away. As I said, there is nothing beyond Susan's opinion of bronies to indicate there is going to be any whining about oppression, and even if there was, it is not reasonable to be offended that somewhere, somebody doesn't consider whether you have it worse before evaluating their own lives despite having absolutely no reason to think of you or anybody else in a similar situation. This wouldn't apply, of course, if we assume Susan believes either than transgendered people are a large portion of the population or that she personally is extremely famous, but I think we can safely assume that she knows neither of these is the case.

So, in summary, though I do hope that we one day live in a truly egalitarian society, being offended by everything accomplishes nothing and I refuse to pretend that actively looking for more reasons to feel victimized just because you already have some real ones is reasonable behavior.

Upon further reading, I would like to add that I do regret how I phrased my original statement, as though I do feel that somebody whining to justify the making of the documentary is not a reason to conclude that the documentary itself will be a long self-indulgent complain about oppression, I now see the thought process that led there. However, I do not retract my conclusion, as, in the unlikely case anybody actually reads what I said, they will see that my argument has redundancy and that the whining being a completely unfounded conclusion was secondary to expected whining being a poor reason for offense anyway. I'll also add at this point that, if this is going to turn into a long argument, it'll be an argument about taking offense and social inequalities and probably reverse racism too by the end of it, and probably won't be related to ponies at all much past this point, so if anybody cares enough to start debating the issue on the other side it should probably go in a separate thread.

This post has been edited by Borg Lord: 26 May 2012 - 06:21 AM

Someone really need to tell you that long winded =/= intelligent.

hurrrrrr~ *vomit*

V-DOS


C-MIX


FUCK YES MY SUMMER IS NOW BOOKED

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 26 May 2012 - 10:47 PM

Pics

MiwAuturu, on 26 May 2012 - 06:57 AM, said:

Someone really needed to tell you that trying to pretend you aren't saying tl;dr =/= intelligent.

But if it really matters that much to you I can try to keep my explanations brief; I'm mainly doing it to try to make it so that everybody in the forums, even the stupid ones, can understand what I'm saying if they care, but since I know nobody does it doesn't really matter whether idiots misunderstand out of boredom or insufficient detail and reiteration.

Tl;dr: that was a weak ad hominem attack and I expect better in the future. Also you can choose whether or not I insulted you back.

This post has been edited by Borg Lord: 27 May 2012 - 03:08 AM

being incredibly fucking condescending is a great way to show that you care

@Borg

Pedantic.

Borg Lord, on 27 May 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

Borg Lord said:

The difference between your Ad hominem and MiwAuturu's Ad hominem is that his is not a fallacy.

It's not the matter of you trying to be brief, it's the fact you use words and write in a form that makes you think that you are intelligent. Instead your rants are so incoherent you make absolutely no sense at all.

Not to mention you're trying to defend the oppression against your sexual fetish against a sexual identity.
Hahahaha

Three questions and two statements:
1) Can you translate "trying to defend your the oppression against your sexual fetish against a sexual identity" into English? I assume the general idea is "I don't like you, therefore you are a furry, therefore your argument is invalid," but I'd like to know for sure.

2) Are you telling me that Susan does believe she is extremely famous? As I pointed out, that would change everything.

3) I don't think I'm intelligent because of how I write; I think other people are stupid because they can't understand me when I say things like "of course I am implicitly assuming that everyone involved is relatively sane, and otherwise my argument is invalid," and assume they can pretend to read my mind and present it as fact. In fact, if one were to pay attention, one might even note that I never say more about my opinion of my intelligence than that I'm not a complete moron, even when my intelligence is specifically made a topic of conversation. Nobody ever draws conclusions, reasonable or otherwise, from that, I've noticed.

4, and most importantly) Assuming that I do write in specific ways to increase my own feeling of intelligence, assuming I am in fact a blithering idiot, assuming that I go out every night to murder babies, why does that matter to the argument? Ad hominem is not a fallacy because it's occasionally misused. And since I've already insulted your intelligence once, I can just outright say that everybody with a brain can tell that your opponent's personal characteristics are not relevant--sorry, I mean "germane," I've got to remember that I'm talking to appear more intelligent--to the argument unless the argument is about your opponent's personal characteristics.

And in response to Kaxbe and Meowth, respectively, indeed I do love being condescending when people use fallacies, and how is it even possible to reply pedantically to something with no actual argument?

Sorry, I almost forgot:
Tl;dr: I never said I'm smart, just smarter than you, and I can tell because I know it has no bearing on the original argument and you don't.

This post has been edited by Borg Lord: 27 May 2012 - 10:33 PM

Borg Lord, on 27 May 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

you sure do like to complain that we're the ones who don't understand how to read. Lack was saying that comparing "oppression" based on a sexual fetish is not at all comparable to oppression based on sexual identity. basically also saying that bronies whine about not being taken seriously because they watch a show intended for little girls while at the same time bashing transgendered people. shittons of bronies have done that before as well as saying that hating them because they like the show is as bad as hating someone because of their sex/gender/race/sexual preference/etc.

Borg Lord, on 27 May 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

no, he's not telling you that, you stupid twit. he's saying that your argument about Susan's level of fame makes no fucking sense.

Borg Lord, on 27 May 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

don't act surprised when people don't understand when you word your sentences like that. you word your posts in needlessly long and complicated ways. you know how else you could've said "of course I am implicitly assuming that everyone involved is relatively sane, and otherwise my argument is invalid"? you could've said "if you guys are morons, then i am wasting my time". you claim not to be a complete moron, but even a complete moron knows that they if they want to be understood by other people, they have to communicate in a way that other people will understand. you, therefore, are lower than a complete moron.

Borg Lord, on 27 May 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

er, but ad hominem is a fallacy. it's a logical fallacy and an informal fallacy. it's "not a fallacy because it's occasionally misused"? don't you think that sentence in itself is a fallacy? it seems that you are actually incapable of making a logical argument of any kind, so you instead hide behind layer upon layer of psuedointellectual bullcrap so it is harder for people to call you out on your bullcrap.

sorry, i almost forgot:
tl;dr - you are a furfag ponyfucker

This post has been edited by Kaxbe: 28 May 2012 - 12:15 AM

Man everyone in here is a fucking asshole except klaus and astley. They are just bronies. Which is better or worse depending on your viewpoint.

Borg Lord, on 27 May 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

Yes, it is very possible to reply pedantically to something with no actual argument. The literal definition is "Being showy of one’s knowledge, often in a boring manner." You can be boring and showy even if you're not arguing; however, I didn't mean it by it's literal definition. The way I used it was to augment what Kaxbe said and to imply pseudo-intellectualism on your part.

Also, the problem being had with your arguments is how they are composed. Make your sentences shorter and simpler. I shouldn't have to piece one sentence together like some elaborate puzzle. Let me supply you with an example:

"I don't think I'm intelligent because of how I write; I think other people are stupid because they can't understand me when I say things like "of course I am implicitly assuming that everyone involved is relatively sane, and otherwise my argument is invalid," and assume they can pretend to read my mind and present it as fact."

For starters, that semi-colon isn't really helping anything. I mean, I see WHY you used it, but that doesn't mean it was a good idea. Maybe if this sentence took less analyzation to understand, it would be a little more acceptable.

Second, I can't even begin to comprehend what you just said. The problem is that I have to look at it over and over again. "of course I am implicitly assuming that everyone involved is relatively sane...ect." still doesn't make sense to me because I can't seem to find it in context, too.

To sum it up, just fucking subdivide the masses of words and maybe talk a little less. This is not a Dostoevsky novel; it is an argument. These sentences don't have to be a work of art. It is great to make them smart, interesting, convincing, or to word them in a way that will deliver your message... Just as long as that message isn't: "I never learned about periods."



Quite frankly, reading your posts would be 10,000x more bearable if you would just end sentences, instead of letting them go on and on and on...

hey guys lets look at some pretty pictures for awhile.

Yes, you caught me. I'm bad at communicating. I suppose I may never have explicitly mentioned it here, but let me be explicit about it: I'm not good with words. If I thought I were, I would be a humanities major. I'm not a humanities major. That said, I don't think it strange that I see that when I talk the way I normally talk to most people, they understand me, and when I talk the way I normally talk (except sometimes with added reiteration because as an engineering major, of course I assume added redundancy can only make failure rarer) here, nobody understands me and I conclude that people here aren't really trying. At the very least I would hope that people would discard possible interpretations that are completely irrelevant to anything that's been said, and in theory that ought not to leave too much variation in the possibilities that remain. But I suppose that interpreting everything as random gibbering will tend to be self-consistent for all but the clearest of writers, which we have established I am not.

Though I would like to clarify one sentence: the "not" in "ad hominem is not a fallacy because it's occasionally misused" is paired with the "because." I think it could be more clearly stated as, "the reason ad hominem is a fallacy is not that it's occasionally misused." I can see where that could be improperly parsed, even if it seems silly to ignore every other sentence because one sentence appears to be saying something contradictory.

But, anyway, I was coming here to apologize because I realized I lied. I may have been condescending when I said that I would change the way I wrote, and implicitly saying that I wasn't going to be very polite when writing in the new style, but I still did mean it in some sense, and I realized that's not going to happen. I cannot easily change my style, and I am not easily convinced to actually try. I long since gave up on doing more than glorified talking to myself around here, so I'm not going to convince myself it matters.

@Rick those all look weird except for RBD in which case it actually looks really hot.


Why is this so cute?
Probably because it's Sweetie Belle playing minecraft.

I'm liking this music.
MandoPony Collection now released! <-- THIS IS FUCKING AWESOME
I'M BLOODY SERIOUS THIS IS SOME OF THE BEST MUSIC I'VE EVER HEARD
Cuz I'm like "Oh this is probably gonna have a couple gems in all of this" then "EVERY SONG IS GOLDEN!"

Taps Too
Dumplingz - Tree Delusion

So much music I'm just too lazy to extract it all.
And again.

I was gonna do an imagedump, but man, just look at this DF. There's so much in there, I ran out of space.

Customs + Comics


Pro-Bro Article

Boys used to be called Girls up until, what, 1530? And Pink was the man-color, with blue being for women, pretty much until post WWII.



AWESOME RBD SHOES

_{m o n d a y s . . .}

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 28 May 2012 - 04:22 PM

Okay, I guess this is sort of relevant, considering Faust is behind it.

What exactly is Milky Way and the Galaxy Girls? I mean, She's created this set of characters, and has been marketing them, I guess. Books and plushies and other trinkets. But there's not a lot of mainstream media showcasing it.

Reading up a bit, it has something to do with the website, and they've got material on YouTube, but...ah...what is it?

And they've all got rollerblades.

bonus mix

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 28 May 2012 - 06:23 PM

Bronies, it takes a lot to disappoint me, but you've finally done it.

Fuck you forever.

Dr. Klaus, on 28 May 2012 - 03:47 PM, said:

It's a pitch, an idea that she can't finance herself. To be either made into a cartoon series, a toy line, or both.

She actually asked hasbro if they would help her, but they ended up getting her to revamp MLP instead.

This post has been edited by CaptainBaconMan: 28 May 2012 - 07:48 PM

...are you sure that's not a puppet? Oh, please let it be a puppet.

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 28 May 2012 - 11:52 PM

Dr. Klaus, on 28 May 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

.
It's not a Puppet, it's a fetish toy that comes with instructions for proper use.

Neat pics by the way. Oh and apparently Lauren Faust is on the documentary crew now. I'm very interested to see what its about now.

Quote

Current bid, 125 GBP (195.96USD)

Already been posted Lack. Not the details anyway but the other side of the picture.

Gotta get with the game man.

Ace, on 29 May 2012 - 03:41 AM, said:

I could upload all the sides of the doll but I figure the lingerie and the face is enough.

LackLuster, on 29 May 2012 - 03:32 AM, said:

Is that all?

If there's a market for it, why not?
I wonder if Hasbro would send a cease and desist to this person if he or she decided to continue making these plush fleshlight holders? Not that I can see Hasbro seeking to go after the sex-toy market anytime soon.

ChewySmokey, on 29 May 2012 - 04:30 AM, said:

See that's why I say, but certain communists don't agree.

>Bronies receive a shoutout from MAD.
>Bronies tell Mad to 'Go to hell' because the characters weren't the same.

so much love and tolerance

Well, I found that laughable.

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 29 May 2012 - 10:39 AM

Dump

Nope

I gotta read this.

old + new


I just keep adding shit don't I?
Vampire stint


NoirDash

/Relevant

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 30 May 2012 - 01:52 AM

Quote

I have seen some weird shit on the internet. Some very weird shit.
This though? This takes the cake.

Imagedump
SHOVE THINGS UP LYRA'S COOCH EDITION

The last one is my fave.
Rad Wallpaper
Source Vector
Bonus
Unfunny meme

I always figured it was because two is better than one.

Comics+

PONYYYYYYYYYYY
Libations

Wallpapers
HAHAHAHA
Princess Cadance Love by ~LuGiAdriel14 on deviantART
iDecree by ~NNUfergs on deviantART
Vinyl 1
Vinyl 2
Hot Pink
Bright Pink
Rust A
Rust B
Chrissy
Paperdash
Dashattack
"Rainbowgasm"
Lyroct

Art

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 31 May 2012 - 02:15 AM

Aughhhh my heart

Read all of this.

EDIT:


Wat

This post has been edited by Dr. Klaus: 31 May 2012 - 08:41 PM

Quote

The way this is worded it just fucking gold.

"the very first MLP plushie to feature a special hole in her butt that you can stick your penis in!"

its even more funny because its completely serious.

This post has been edited by Supah: 31 May 2012 - 11:17 AM

oh my look at all those exclamation points.

Also, technically it's not a "hole in her butt"

It's a vagina

Vaginas aren't found in butts.

haha i don't even

honestly

eclectic

also haha that one with Rarity's Shipping Goggles is funny

Dr. Klaus, on 31 May 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:

I have to wholeheartedly disagree here.

Meowth, on 01 June 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

well, the vag-hole isn't in the anus, but then there's the lips and asscrack...