Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Age: 23
Date Signed Up:6/28/2011
Last Login:10/25/2016
Content Thumbs: 1606 total,  1890 ,  284
Comment Thumbs: 6928 total,  7389 ,  461
Content Level Progress: 91% (91/100)
Level 115 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 116 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 55% (55/100)
Level 261 Comments: Pure Win → Level 262 Comments: Pure Win
Content Views:76647
Times Content Favorited:68 times
Total Comments Made:1191
FJ Points:7866
Favorite Tags: the (6) | a (5) | shit (4) | what (4) | fuck (3) | i (3) | is (3) | aint (2) | Asian (2) | Awesome (2) | batman (2) | Crazy (2) | Damn (2) | God (2) | gonna (2) | lol (2) | some (2) | that (2)
I can get along with anyone (so long as they aren't unreasonable), and am always accepting friend requests!

latest user's comments

#1 - Holy ****!  [+] (1 reply) 05/28/2014 on Close Call 0
#2 - wbrehmer (05/28/2014) [-]
That water did him a HUGE favor by moving him over like that
#2 - Chicken's fw  [+] (3 replies) 05/12/2014 on KFC ain't got nothing on me +136
User avatar
#49 - Dember (05/13/2014) [-]
Somebody should tell him roosters don't have penises.

Basically all birds aside from ducks, geese and swans basically have lesbian sex.

Except...with sperm.
#53 - nao (05/13/2014) [-]
Go on
User avatar
#56 - Dember (05/13/2014) [-]
Well I'm not exactly a bird sex expert. But. Uh, let's see.

Apparently, waterfowl only have penises because it's so difficult for them to mate the normal way. Otherwise, all other birds just have a cloaca and internal testes, so it's basically like mashing two vaginas together and the male ejaculates.

As far as animal sex goes, it's kind of...bland. Some are just plain dumbfounding, like, say...hyenas, some spiders, octopi...even snakes. Animals are weird.
#1 - Purpler is correct, Word is right to suggest it.  [+] (8 replies) 05/12/2014 on Come on, Word… +93
User avatar
#23 - thepandaking (05/13/2014) [-]
it could be "they were more purple than they were blue" which would make more sense in my opinion.
User avatar
#30 - aesguitar (05/13/2014) [-]
"The were purpler than they were blue."

That would be grammatically correct though.
User avatar
#33 - thepandaking (05/14/2014) [-]
right but it would still be a better option than that from a writing perspective, and it wouldn't be wrong.
User avatar
#34 - aesguitar (05/14/2014) [-]
No, it wouldn't. A college English professor would catch that. Especially in written English, grammar is more important than how it sounds.

"That flower had a more purple hue than that other flower."
"That flow had a purpler hue than that other flower."

Not only is the second sentence grammatically correct, for someone who is lazy, it is also somewhat shorter.

The only reason purpler sounds strange is because it is one of the few multi-syllabic words that has that comparative form, generally it is "more + word."
User avatar
#36 - thepandaking (05/14/2014) [-]
well that's an example where that sounds better, because that's comparing one flower to another, but when you're comparing one descriptive aspect to another, like "that flower was more purple than it was blue" you're giving the same message as "it was purpler than it was blue" but and this is solely from a perspective of what sounds better syntactically, not what is correct from any written rule of grammar I feel like you'd want to keep a uniformity in that clause, like keeping 'purple' and 'blue' both in the same form. It rolls with the sentence better and gives a more solid impression of comparison in my opinion.

I'm not saying it's more right than the other, I'm only saying that in my opinion it sounds better, and wouldn't be wrong. Again, just my opinion, I never meant that I was 100% correct and you weren't.
User avatar
#35 - aesguitar (05/14/2014) [-]
#20 - xcoreyx (05/13/2014) [-]
Even if purpler is correct, it doesn't mean that more purple is incorrect. You can always use that option.

Saltier, more salty
Gayer, more gay
Softer, more soft
#10 - greenwithenvy (05/13/2014) [-]
#3 - I feel it Bobby. 05/12/2014 on Bobby! 0