• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Sketchy last won the day on September 14

Sketchy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2238 God of Likes


About Sketchy

  • Rank
    IQ's Most Hated Poster 2017

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
  • Alliance Pip
    Cobra Kai Dojo
  • Leader Name
  • Nation Name
  • Nation ID
  • Alliance Name
    Cobra Kai Dojo

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name

Recent Profile Visitors

2052 profile views
  1. You do realize you are both agreeing with each other right.
  2. I'd like to thank IQ for acknowledging my hard work and voting me for most hated poster of 2017. Its great to be recognized for my accomplishments. I shall wear this like a badge of honor.

    1. Buorhann


      Fat lady singing already huh?  Just wait.  I'll be a surprised nomination and beat you by a landslide.

    2. Sketchy


      Great competition only makes the victory more sweet.

    3. Buorhann
  3. Because Kastor did it once.
  4. Not sure exactly what people would expect to be done about it. Since when is coordinating a vote considered cheating? How do you determine how many votes are "legitimate"? Ultimately if people choose to just vote for whatever their leader or whoever tells them to its still their choice lmfao. Stop whining and whip votes yourself. Voter turnout is pretty low after all.
  5. We aren't at the hegemoney stage yet but it seems everyone is eager to get there lmfao. edit: smh why does hege mony autochange to hegemoney sheepy
  6. I mean, you are completely butchering the context lmfao. EMC/IQ =/= politics. I didn't say nothing would ever change, small things change all the time, its just the games politics remain mostly the same and are cyclical in nature, and all the grudges and beefs held by various players stay the same. The current dynamic between IQ and EMC mirrors the dynamic that existed between t$-oo and paracov down to the narratives and rhetoric. Here lemme make a nice pic for you Some things can delay the cycle but it'll always go back to that lmfao. These days it just takes twice as long to get through the cycle apparently lmfao.
  7. I heard about this, pretty sad really. It seems more like a side effect of social media in general, tends to make people major twats over really small and trivial shit. I do find it ironic that the people responsible for her harassment are among the same people who constantly rattle on about female consent only to turn around and blast her when her consent is violated.
  8. This is going to be a long war lmfao.
  9. Is everyone still !@#$ing about the results? If you care enough why not devote your energy to whipping votes against the popular choices atm? smh lmfao cmon
  10. That video was 10/10 well done lmfao.
  11. We literally just had a discussion about it and now suddenly it moved on? Spinning what narrative? I'm literally trying to get the topic onto a more constructive path so it has some actual positive results if at all possible. As for your second post, no it wouldn't be okay because that would be a bad idea, which is literally my entire point, bias is irrelevant to an idea because something is either a good idea or a bad idea, WHY a person proposes an idea has no bearing on whether or not that idea is a good proposal or not. This point seems continuously fly right over your head. You seem to have issues with basic comprehension. Anyway I'll cut my losses and just ignore you in the hopes other people who understand context and have basic comprehension skills and actual proposals fill up the gaps.
  12. All the other people !@#$ing (who I disagree with just to be clear) are not Bourhann. Normally people respond to what a person says not what other people say. You questioned his motives, he said he wasn't biased, you said he was, he said he wasn't. He addressed your response directly and then you both argued over whether he was lying which is a completely redundant argument. I suggested you both move on and just discuss the proposal. I said bias was irrelevant to a proposal not in general. You really aren't great at context are you. Let me quote myself to save time. So you can keep harping on about how biased Bourhann is, or you can provide constructive arguments about the actual topic and not Bourhann. If you don't pick up what I'm putting down this time I'll add you to my ever growing list of "Don't talk to this person unless you feel like tormenting the intellectually challenged for amusement".
  13. Okay so clearly yet again you've missed the point of what I was saying for the final time I'll try to illuminate it for you. If your goal is literally just to smear Bourhanns character than fine w/e carry on. If your goal is to object to the proposal, then actually address the proposal and its flaws not the perceived motivation behind them (or atleast do both). If your goal is to actually constructively propose ideas and arguments for improving the voting system, then object to the proposal and counter with your own. Arguing about bias doesn't serve to further the argument, you'll just be arguing about it over and over and nothing constructive will come about it. Not sure how you could have so completely misunderstood my posts lmfao. I was pretty clear.
  14. While this is the easiest solution, it does kinda remove the community involvement element that makes these sorts of thing interesting. Personally I find the nomination period the most fun because you get to see individual perspectives of members of the community on most of the topics of the year.
  15. I think you missed my point, which is not that proposals can't be biased, its that ultimately the bias is irrelevant. Either the idea is a good one or a bad one. The motivation/intention of the person proposing the idea only says something about that persons character, it says nothing about the actual validity of the idea. Bourhanns motivations for proposing the idea are not a strike against the idea but again Bourhanns character assuming you are correct. A criticism of the idea would be something like "this won't eliminate bias and good luck getting alliances to form a consensus on anything". What you are doing is fighting assumed bias with opposing bias rather than just telling him why his idea is a bad one.