Uhhhh
Can I go with AleX?

Ding ding ding we have a winner!

what the whole game i thought it said mason woods

Woods is a different character

that would seem to make more sense

the real gta 4 trailer right here

It really was "Yeah"

yeah

You know the text or the test was "yeah"...? If you know, can you tell me?

It really was "Yeah"

Wait, that's all?

Yes, the text was literally "Yeah" That is it.

Way to keep it going sport.

Bitch please that's classic smoke (Pre-robot)

Ooooooh. Thanks :)

But she has been edited into the picture why?

She's usually shown in pictures with a sort of moody face or "unimpressed" face, Zach edited this one in with a smile showing that he managed to impress her.

Ooooooh. Thanks :)

Probably.

The ambiguous use of the pronoun "he" leaves your sentence to many different interpretations. The point of language is to communicate what you want to say, not to leave stupid riddles in ordinary sentences for people to decode.

but he [and here i specify yourlordandmaster, since you seem to have trouble with pronouns] can't be held responsible for the imbecility of every idiot who he has the bad fortune of having to respond to

especially in this case, where as I see it you were "eavesdropping" more or less on something he said to somebody else and now you're whining that you can't understand it
how often do homeless people walk into physics labs and whine about them not explaining the science enough?
actually [being someone who works in a lab] that happens a lot more than you'd think...

Your analogy is flawed, seeing as how the conversation in question was about me in the first place.

If I told you that he liked to bike in wednesday, should you be the one to blame for not understanding that? No, I am to blame, because that sentence makes no fucking sense to anyone but me. The point of communication is to let other people understand what you're saying. So yes, if he does not know how to communicate effectively, he is the one to blame for me not understanding him.

I don't have a problem with pronouns. I have a problem with the ambiguous use of them, which can lead to shitty conversations like this.

hahah well technically it is a near-perfect analogy if it is a biophysics lab currently studying lung cancer which the homeless person has... but that's beside the point

in response to your example, I, being the reader who apparently cares enough about what you say to try to decipher it, have the burden of deciphering and personally I have no issues with the sentence you just said - you are trying to communicate that somebody [probably male, and since you used the pronoun, it's clearly someone you see no need to introduce, which is information enough] likes to bike on wednesdays

but again i digress because it all comes down to who cares the most about the communication getting through - if you care so much about what someone else is saying then the burden of translation is on you to figure out what they meant; a better analogy would be if you heard two foreigners speaking and one dropped your name, it would be your job to learn their language or read their expressions to determine what they meant, because they damn sure didn't say it for your benefit. so, too, you have to realize that, while yes it sucks when people say things cryptically and you can't understand them, it clearly signifies that they did not care enough about you understanding them to learn how to speak correctly in the first place. so as the only person in the situation who does care, it is your job alone to decipher the meaning
i'm really not trying to be a condescending dick here [although that's always how it comes out when i talk...] but more to give helpful advice on why you shouldn't blame others for things they dont care about at all

No, the analogy was not perfect, nor was it even that good. If it is as perfect as you are implying, then you are saying that I don't understand my own language enough to correct someone else's misuse of it.

I didn't blame him for anything. He said something that implied that I was a shithead. I refuted it, and he said that that is not what he meant. I was therefore perfectly justified in telling him that he needed an English lesson, because he did not communicate properly what he was trying to say.

If the people in your example were shitty enough to talk about someone behind their back deliberately, the fact that I don't know the language has nothing to do with the fact that they are assholes for doing it in the first place.

sigh alright i'll respond... oh and first off thanks for attacking my other analogy too hahah i don't get why you felt the need to i don't even care enough about it to defend it

anyway i'll start with your last point and i suppose [being the person who wanted to communicate this to you] I should have said this point more directly rather than hoping you'd get the implication through various illustrations - yes, from your point of view the people are assholes for not presenting the information in a way in which you and everybody else who wanted to can easily see and understand it, but the fact that they are assholes who don't care whether or not you understand them [which is quite different from deliberately making sure you don't, though i suppose in your defense i could have made that clearer in my analogy if i had cared enough to do so] does not in itself mean that you deserve it to be clear cut and handed to you on a silver platter. if they don't care whether or not you understand and you do care about understanding it, then the only for you to understand the meaning is if you do the work of deciphering it, which is really not that hard man i mean it's like when you're skimming through an essay you have to read for work or school or something and you see the words "John", "booze", and "car accident" do you really need to read all the little articles and prepositions in between to understand that some guy named John got drunk and drove?

my last point doesn't fit here so if you care enough to read further i'll add it as a comment to this one

anyway last point - i suppose it all comes down to interpretation, but here are the facts: first guy asks how often does SenorButtPlug come up in normal conversation? fair enough question, right? second guy tries to respond by saying that "he" says your name a lot on random content so much so that it confuses second guy
speaking rationally, there are only two "he"s that second guy could be referring to - yourself or this evilklown in the content above
now you somehow immediately took the first of these options assuming that “he” could not but be you and, in that context, second guy was implying that you are some narcissistic asshole who says his name all the time (and if I were even more of an asshole than I am, I might even use that to take a shot at your psychological projections stemming from possible personal inadequacies, like when you mention how big a guy's Hummer is and he immediately comes back with “my penis is NOT small!!” - not to say yours is, it's just another of my bad analogies :D)
now personally i see the above conversation and immediately “know” (though of course it's just a guess) that second guy was talking about the evilklown above, course for my part that's because I happen to remember some content or comment a while back where you had said something to the effect of people saying your name too much or not enough or something and, being the person I am, immediately thought of mentioning you over and over and over for the lulz [and also because your username, as first guy put it, is quite a hilariously interesting one for to come up in normal conversation]; I chose against it and forgot all about it until I see that this evilklown has apparently had the very same idea - so that's what I figured second guy meant by “he”and why I took it upon myself to take all this time in an attempt to help you see the ambiguity of communication itself despite its non-ambiguous aspirations

TL:DR

don't worry little buddy nobody expects you to - this is a grown up conversation you probably wouldn't understand anyway

Whatever, I'm just happy that my actions started an argument, good day!

hahah all the best do

too

"He says it on random content" so this must mean something different?

If you read the picture it's very clear I meant the guy who keeps saying his name

Then you need to learn proper sentence structure.

< because you're a dumbass.

Right back at ya bud.

Whatever, man. Just stop thinking any of us give a shit.

You came out of nowhere and interjected yourself into this conversation that had nothing to do with you. If you didn't give a shit you would have stayed out of it.

Context. The picture has a dude saying your name loads, that guy asks how often your name comes up and I said he says it a lot. Think about it.

The ambiguous use of the pronoun "he" leaves your sentence to many different interpretations. The point of language is to communicate what you want to say, not to leave stupid riddles in ordinary sentences for people to decode.

but he [and here i specify yourlordandmaster, since you seem to have trouble with pronouns] can't be held responsible for the imbecility of every idiot who he has the bad fortune of having to respond to

especially in this case, where as I see it you were "eavesdropping" more or less on something he said to somebody else and now you're whining that you can't understand it
how often do homeless people walk into physics labs and whine about them not explaining the science enough?
actually [being someone who works in a lab] that happens a lot more than you'd think...

Your analogy is flawed, seeing as how the conversation in question was about me in the first place.

If I told you that he liked to bike in wednesday, should you be the one to blame for not understanding that? No, I am to blame, because that sentence makes no fucking sense to anyone but me. The point of communication is to let other people understand what you're saying. So yes, if he does not know how to communicate effectively, he is the one to blame for me not understanding him.

I don't have a problem with pronouns. I have a problem with the ambiguous use of them, which can lead to shitty conversations like this.

hahah well technically it is a near-perfect analogy if it is a biophysics lab currently studying lung cancer which the homeless person has... but that's beside the point

in response to your example, I, being the reader who apparently cares enough about what you say to try to decipher it, have the burden of deciphering and personally I have no issues with the sentence you just said - you are trying to communicate that somebody [probably male, and since you used the pronoun, it's clearly someone you see no need to introduce, which is information enough] likes to bike on wednesdays

but again i digress because it all comes down to who cares the most about the communication getting through - if you care so much about what someone else is saying then the burden of translation is on you to figure out what they meant; a better analogy would be if you heard two foreigners speaking and one dropped your name, it would be your job to learn their language or read their expressions to determine what they meant, because they damn sure didn't say it for your benefit. so, too, you have to realize that, while yes it sucks when people say things cryptically and you can't understand them, it clearly signifies that they did not care enough about you understanding them to learn how to speak correctly in the first place. so as the only person in the situation who does care, it is your job alone to decipher the meaning
i'm really not trying to be a condescending dick here [although that's always how it comes out when i talk...] but more to give helpful advice on why you shouldn't blame others for things they dont care about at all

No, the analogy was not perfect, nor was it even that good. If it is as perfect as you are implying, then you are saying that I don't understand my own language enough to correct someone else's misuse of it.

I didn't blame him for anything. He said something that implied that I was a shithead. I refuted it, and he said that that is not what he meant. I was therefore perfectly justified in telling him that he needed an English lesson, because he did not communicate properly what he was trying to say.

If the people in your example were shitty enough to talk about someone behind their back deliberately, the fact that I don't know the language has nothing to do with the fact that they are assholes for doing it in the first place.

sigh alright i'll respond... oh and first off thanks for attacking my other analogy too hahah i don't get why you felt the need to i don't even care enough about it to defend it

anyway i'll start with your last point and i suppose [being the person who wanted to communicate this to you] I should have said this point more directly rather than hoping you'd get the implication through various illustrations - yes, from your point of view the people are assholes for not presenting the information in a way in which you and everybody else who wanted to can easily see and understand it, but the fact that they are assholes who don't care whether or not you understand them [which is quite different from deliberately making sure you don't, though i suppose in your defense i could have made that clearer in my analogy if i had cared enough to do so] does not in itself mean that you deserve it to be clear cut and handed to you on a silver platter. if they don't care whether or not you understand and you do care about understanding it, then the only for you to understand the meaning is if you do the work of deciphering it, which is really not that hard man i mean it's like when you're skimming through an essay you have to read for work or school or something and you see the words "John", "booze", and "car accident" do you really need to read all the little articles and prepositions in between to understand that some guy named John got drunk and drove?

my last point doesn't fit here so if you care enough to read further i'll add it as a comment to this one

anyway last point - i suppose it all comes down to interpretation, but here are the facts: first guy asks how often does SenorButtPlug come up in normal conversation? fair enough question, right? second guy tries to respond by saying that "he" says your name a lot on random content so much so that it confuses second guy
speaking rationally, there are only two "he"s that second guy could be referring to - yourself or this evilklown in the content above
now you somehow immediately took the first of these options assuming that “he” could not but be you and, in that context, second guy was implying that you are some narcissistic asshole who says his name all the time (and if I were even more of an asshole than I am, I might even use that to take a shot at your psychological projections stemming from possible personal inadequacies, like when you mention how big a guy's Hummer is and he immediately comes back with “my penis is NOT small!!” - not to say yours is, it's just another of my bad analogies :D)
now personally i see the above conversation and immediately “know” (though of course it's just a guess) that second guy was talking about the evilklown above, course for my part that's because I happen to remember some content or comment a while back where you had said something to the effect of people saying your name too much or not enough or something and, being the person I am, immediately thought of mentioning you over and over and over for the lulz [and also because your username, as first guy put it, is quite a hilariously interesting one for to come up in normal conversation]; I chose against it and forgot all about it until I see that this evilklown has apparently had the very same idea - so that's what I figured second guy meant by “he”and why I took it upon myself to take all this time in an attempt to help you see the ambiguity of communication itself despite its non-ambiguous aspirations

TL:DR

don't worry little buddy nobody expects you to - this is a grown up conversation you probably wouldn't understand anyway

Whatever, I'm just happy that my actions started an argument, good day!

hahah all the best do

too

You are right.

I've never said my own name on other people's content.

I didn't say you did

"He says it on random content" so this must mean something different?

If you read the picture it's very clear I meant the guy who keeps saying his name

Then you need to learn proper sentence structure.

< because you're a dumbass.

Right back at ya bud.

Whatever, man. Just stop thinking any of us give a shit.

You came out of nowhere and interjected yourself into this conversation that had nothing to do with you. If you didn't give a shit you would have stayed out of it.

Context. The picture has a dude saying your name loads, that guy asks how often your name comes up and I said he says it a lot. Think about it.

The ambiguous use of the pronoun "he" leaves your sentence to many different interpretations. The point of language is to communicate what you want to say, not to leave stupid riddles in ordinary sentences for people to decode.

but he [and here i specify yourlordandmaster, since you seem to have trouble with pronouns] can't be held responsible for the imbecility of every idiot who he has the bad fortune of having to respond to

especially in this case, where as I see it you were "eavesdropping" more or less on something he said to somebody else and now you're whining that you can't understand it
how often do homeless people walk into physics labs and whine about them not explaining the science enough?
actually [being someone who works in a lab] that happens a lot more than you'd think...

Your analogy is flawed, seeing as how the conversation in question was about me in the first place.

If I told you that he liked to bike in wednesday, should you be the one to blame for not understanding that? No, I am to blame, because that sentence makes no fucking sense to anyone but me. The point of communication is to let other people understand what you're saying. So yes, if he does not know how to communicate effectively, he is the one to blame for me not understanding him.

I don't have a problem with pronouns. I have a problem with the ambiguous use of them, which can lead to shitty conversations like this.

hahah well technically it is a near-perfect analogy if it is a biophysics lab currently studying lung cancer which the homeless person has... but that's beside the point

in response to your example, I, being the reader who apparently cares enough about what you say to try to decipher it, have the burden of deciphering and personally I have no issues with the sentence you just said - you are trying to communicate that somebody [probably male, and since you used the pronoun, it's clearly someone you see no need to introduce, which is information enough] likes to bike on wednesdays

but again i digress because it all comes down to who cares the most about the communication getting through - if you care so much about what someone else is saying then the burden of translation is on you to figure out what they meant; a better analogy would be if you heard two foreigners speaking and one dropped your name, it would be your job to learn their language or read their expressions to determine what they meant, because they damn sure didn't say it for your benefit. so, too, you have to realize that, while yes it sucks when people say things cryptically and you can't understand them, it clearly signifies that they did not care enough about you understanding them to learn how to speak correctly in the first place. so as the only person in the situation who does care, it is your job alone to decipher the meaning
i'm really not trying to be a condescending dick here [although that's always how it comes out when i talk...] but more to give helpful advice on why you shouldn't blame others for things they dont care about at all

No, the analogy was not perfect, nor was it even that good. If it is as perfect as you are implying, then you are saying that I don't understand my own language enough to correct someone else's misuse of it.

I didn't blame him for anything. He said something that implied that I was a shithead. I refuted it, and he said that that is not what he meant. I was therefore perfectly justified in telling him that he needed an English lesson, because he did not communicate properly what he was trying to say.

If the people in your example were shitty enough to talk about someone behind their back deliberately, the fact that I don't know the language has nothing to do with the fact that they are assholes for doing it in the first place.

sigh alright i'll respond... oh and first off thanks for attacking my other analogy too hahah i don't get why you felt the need to i don't even care enough about it to defend it

anyway i'll start with your last point and i suppose [being the person who wanted to communicate this to you] I should have said this point more directly rather than hoping you'd get the implication through various illustrations - yes, from your point of view the people are assholes for not presenting the information in a way in which you and everybody else who wanted to can easily see and understand it, but the fact that they are assholes who don't care whether or not you understand them [which is quite different from deliberately making sure you don't, though i suppose in your defense i could have made that clearer in my analogy if i had cared enough to do so] does not in itself mean that you deserve it to be clear cut and handed to you on a silver platter. if they don't care whether or not you understand and you do care about understanding it, then the only for you to understand the meaning is if you do the work of deciphering it, which is really not that hard man i mean it's like when you're skimming through an essay you have to read for work or school or something and you see the words "John", "booze", and "car accident" do you really need to read all the little articles and prepositions in between to understand that some guy named John got drunk and drove?

my last point doesn't fit here so if you care enough to read further i'll add it as a comment to this one

anyway last point - i suppose it all comes down to interpretation, but here are the facts: first guy asks how often does SenorButtPlug come up in normal conversation? fair enough question, right? second guy tries to respond by saying that "he" says your name a lot on random content so much so that it confuses second guy
speaking rationally, there are only two "he"s that second guy could be referring to - yourself or this evilklown in the content above
now you somehow immediately took the first of these options assuming that “he” could not but be you and, in that context, second guy was implying that you are some narcissistic asshole who says his name all the time (and if I were even more of an asshole than I am, I might even use that to take a shot at your psychological projections stemming from possible personal inadequacies, like when you mention how big a guy's Hummer is and he immediately comes back with “my penis is NOT small!!” - not to say yours is, it's just another of my bad analogies :D)
now personally i see the above conversation and immediately “know” (though of course it's just a guess) that second guy was talking about the evilklown above, course for my part that's because I happen to remember some content or comment a while back where you had said something to the effect of people saying your name too much or not enough or something and, being the person I am, immediately thought of mentioning you over and over and over for the lulz [and also because your username, as first guy put it, is quite a hilariously interesting one for to come up in normal conversation]; I chose against it and forgot all about it until I see that this evilklown has apparently had the very same idea - so that's what I figured second guy meant by “he”and why I took it upon myself to take all this time in an attempt to help you see the ambiguity of communication itself despite its non-ambiguous aspirations

TL:DR

don't worry little buddy nobody expects you to - this is a grown up conversation you probably wouldn't understand anyway

Whatever, I'm just happy that my actions started an argument, good day!

hahah all the best do

too

i'm joking.

I left out an important part: It was NSFW content he says it in, so I thought it was somehow relevant, but confusing.

You are right.