x
Click to expand

ottofan

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:4/07/2012
Last Login:7/02/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#11502
Comment Ranking:#14228
Highest Content Rank:#1520
Highest Comment Rank:#7893
Content Thumbs: 7193 total,  7871 ,  678
Comment Thumbs: 1171 total,  1388 ,  217
Content Level Progress: 95% (95/100)
Level 171 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 172 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Comment Level Progress: 78% (39/50)
Level 210 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 211 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:2
Content Views:205341
Times Content Favorited:296 times
Total Comments Made:231
FJ Points:8548

Funny Text/Links

Funny Pictures

  • Views: 89609
    Thumbs Up 4771 Thumbs Down 158 Total: +4613
    Comments: 227
    Favorites: 202
    Uploaded: 05/29/12
    He is the Catman He is the Catman
  • Views: 50367
    Thumbs Up 1281 Thumbs Down 133 Total: +1148
    Comments: 159
    Favorites: 32
    Uploaded: 12/13/12
    Vikings are alphas as fuck Vikings are alphas as fuck
  • Views: 26322
    Thumbs Up 1151 Thumbs Down 205 Total: +946
    Comments: 27
    Favorites: 44
    Uploaded: 05/12/12
    FJ is pahnny FJ is pahnny
  • Views: 17775
    Thumbs Up 440 Thumbs Down 30 Total: +410
    Comments: 4
    Favorites: 15
    Uploaded: 01/30/13
    Apperently Jesus was an Boxer Apperently Jesus was an Boxer
  • Views: 3888
    Thumbs Up 74 Thumbs Down 23 Total: +51
    Comments: 9
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 08/05/12
    get your own title asshole get your own title asshole
  • Views: 2122
    Thumbs Up 37 Thumbs Down 12 Total: +25
    Comments: 1
    Favorites: 2
    Uploaded: 05/26/12
    Punchline Punchline
1 2 3 > [ 14 ]

latest user's comments

#40 - If you see it in that way, sure.  [+] (32 new replies) 06/05/2015 on Graduation Speech 0
User avatar #41 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
what "way"? you were wrong and i showed you how. theres no other "way" to see it
#43 - John Cena (06/05/2015) [-]
How was he wrong exactly? you just said they could have fucked in 92 or 93, that's not the same year... fuckin pleb
User avatar #42 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
Are you fucking stupid? 1992 and 1993 aren't the same year. The post clearly says "during the same year".
User avatar #44 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
yes. "during" the same year. not "in" the same year. if it had said in, then yes, you would have been correct. april 92 to march 93 is not in the same year. but april 92 to march 93 is absofuckinglutely during the same year. it's the time period of one year, not the calendar organization of jan to dec but a year nonetheless. >>#43 you too
User avatar #45 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
During the same year is "in" the same year. It would've been different if it said "during the period of one year".
User avatar #47 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
but it isn't. during the same year means 12 months. their parents all fucked within the same twelve months.
User avatar #48 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
Okay, let's agree to disagree.
User avatar #50 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
why? one of us is right and so far i'm the only one who's explained their position and backed it up using the content
#51 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
"During the same year" can mean either during the calendar year or during a period of 12 months, no one is right or wrong in this argument. You think it means one thing, everyone else thinks it means another, so we all have to agree to disagree.
User avatar #53 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
im saying that april 92 to march 93 is just as valid as jan 92 to dec 92 when you use during. everyone else disagrees. but you clearly just said that april 92 to march 93 is just as valid as jan 92 to dec 92 when you use during, so doesnt that make me right and them wrong? them being >>#35, >>#43, >>#42, >>#30, and >>#46?
User avatar #56 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
That's not what he/she said. Also, we figured out we're arguing over semantics and that it won't lead us anywhere, you should do the same.
User avatar #57 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
i should just shut up even though i am definitively correct? why?
User avatar #58 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
No, you should shut up because you're making a complete idiot out of yourself. you even started contradicting yourself.
User avatar #59 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
i contradicted myself? where?
User avatar #61 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
When you claim we're wrong for assuming the post meant the calendar organization. When Dmhhh claims both our and your assumptions can be correct. You claim to be correct because of it Lord knows why.
User avatar #64 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
im saying it can be either. it could be calendar, it could be 12 months. you are saying that it can only be calendar, and that it cant be 12 months. but thats wrong, since it can be either.
User avatar #66 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
If we assumed it's the calendar system the post is referring to you'd be automatically wrong, is it that hard to understand? We can't know for sure if it is or if it's what you claim it is.
User avatar #67 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
and if we assumed your logic is retarded we would be absolutely correct. assuming things is dumber than shit. a pile of feces is smarter than assuming things. assuming something from the content has as much validity as pulling an answer out of your ass. assuming has no place here. get the fuck out with your assuming.
User avatar #69 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
I quit, maybe someone more patient than me can help you out.
User avatar #63 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
You say you're right and we're wrong and at the same time you admit we're correct unknowingly.
User avatar #65 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
im not saying that it couldnt be calendar, im saying it could either be calendar or 12 months.

you are saying that it cant be 12 months.

it can clearly be either.

you are explicitly incorrect
#54 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
No one is right or wrong in this argument. Since there is no clarification given in the original joke, no one can know whether it means calendar year or a period of twelve months.
User avatar #55 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
ill speak slower. they said it cannot be the second meaning. I said it can. you just confirmed that it can have to meanings. they said it can only have one. i said it can be either. you just confirmed that it can be either.

i dont know what else to say

how many more ways do i have to say this
#60 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
The answer changes depending on whether the original joke was talking about a calendar year or a 12-month period. If they were talking about a calendar year (Everyone there was born in 1992 for example) then you CAN'T be correct, because your example would have two people there being born in two separate calendar years.
User avatar #62 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
there is no clarification. it will forever be unknown whether they meant calendar or just 12 months.

which leaves us with two possibilities. either calendar or 12 months. 5 people have said that it can ONLY be calendar. but it cant. it can be either calendar or 12 months. i have said that it can either be calendar or 12 months. and it can. it can be either calendar or 12 months.

which makes those 5 people incorrect. they refuse the second possibility with no evidence. and it makes me correct.
#68 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
"what 'way'? you were wrong and i showed you how. theres no other 'way' to see it"

In that comment you claimed he was wrong for assuming the joke was referring to a calendar year. However, if the joke IS referring to a calendar year he is correct and you are incorrect, but if the joke is referring to a period of 12-months you are correct and he is incorrect.
User avatar #70 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
a quote from >>#35: "false."

he refused to believe that 12 months is a possibility. i showed him that 12 months is a possibility. he was a smartass (if you see it that way) again refusing the possibility of 12 months. he was incorrect, because 12 months is a possibility.
#71 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
12-months IS a possibility, but that's never what the argument has been about. Your stance (that it refers to both, not that it CAN refer to both. We can determine that your stance refers to both instead of the possibility of either from the fact that you claimed he is wrong, which he isn't if the joke refers only to a calendar year.) is only correct if the joke is referring to both calendar year and 12-months. Since there is absolutely no way of knowing whether it's referring to calendar year, 12 months or both there is no way anyone can be correct or incorrect.
User avatar #73 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
that is not my stance, and i already detailed in >>#70 how you are incorrect there. my stance is that it can refer to both. my stance is not, and never has been, that it refers to both. that is retarded. the two options are separate and it's impossible for it to refer to both.
i disagreed with him because he said that it cant refer to both. i called him wrong because he said it cant refer to both. i said it can refer to both. i LITERALLY NEVER said that it refers to both.

therefore, you are wrong. my stance is that it can refer to both, and since there is no way of knowing which one it is, im right either way.
>>#35, >>#43, >>#42, >>#30, and >>#46's stance it that it can only be referring to calendar, and since there is no way of knowing which one it is, they are wrong.
#81 - dmhhh (06/07/2015) [-]
"A CALENDAR IS TWELVE MONTHS YOU DUMBASS"

My god you're not worth the headache, this is so basic. I sincerely hope you were just trolling or something. Just reread everything I've said and hopefully one day you'll get it, everyone but you has gotten it so far.
User avatar #76 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
>>#74 A CALENDAR IS TWELVE MONTHS YOU DUMBASS
#74 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
"but it isn't. during the same year means 12 months. their parents all fucked within the same twelve months."

In this comment you say with complete certainty that it refers to 12 months, not that it can refer to either a calendar year or 12 months.
#35 - false. My parents ****** in '92 and i was born '93. Som…  [+] (34 new replies) 06/05/2015 on Graduation Speech 0
#37 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
so lets say that being born from jan 93 to dec 93 would put you in the same grad class. the earliest your parents could have boned is april 92, and the latest they could have smashed no-no bits is march 93. april 92 to april 93 is a 13 months, so april 92 to march 93 is exactly one year.
User avatar #40 - ottofan (06/05/2015) [-]
If you see it in that way, sure.
User avatar #41 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
what "way"? you were wrong and i showed you how. theres no other "way" to see it
#43 - John Cena (06/05/2015) [-]
How was he wrong exactly? you just said they could have fucked in 92 or 93, that's not the same year... fuckin pleb
User avatar #42 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
Are you fucking stupid? 1992 and 1993 aren't the same year. The post clearly says "during the same year".
User avatar #44 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
yes. "during" the same year. not "in" the same year. if it had said in, then yes, you would have been correct. april 92 to march 93 is not in the same year. but april 92 to march 93 is absofuckinglutely during the same year. it's the time period of one year, not the calendar organization of jan to dec but a year nonetheless. >>#43 you too
User avatar #45 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
During the same year is "in" the same year. It would've been different if it said "during the period of one year".
User avatar #47 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
but it isn't. during the same year means 12 months. their parents all fucked within the same twelve months.
User avatar #48 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
Okay, let's agree to disagree.
User avatar #50 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
why? one of us is right and so far i'm the only one who's explained their position and backed it up using the content
#51 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
"During the same year" can mean either during the calendar year or during a period of 12 months, no one is right or wrong in this argument. You think it means one thing, everyone else thinks it means another, so we all have to agree to disagree.
User avatar #53 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
im saying that april 92 to march 93 is just as valid as jan 92 to dec 92 when you use during. everyone else disagrees. but you clearly just said that april 92 to march 93 is just as valid as jan 92 to dec 92 when you use during, so doesnt that make me right and them wrong? them being >>#35, >>#43, >>#42, >>#30, and >>#46?
User avatar #56 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
That's not what he/she said. Also, we figured out we're arguing over semantics and that it won't lead us anywhere, you should do the same.
User avatar #57 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
i should just shut up even though i am definitively correct? why?
User avatar #58 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
No, you should shut up because you're making a complete idiot out of yourself. you even started contradicting yourself.
User avatar #59 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
i contradicted myself? where?
User avatar #61 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
When you claim we're wrong for assuming the post meant the calendar organization. When Dmhhh claims both our and your assumptions can be correct. You claim to be correct because of it Lord knows why.
User avatar #64 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
im saying it can be either. it could be calendar, it could be 12 months. you are saying that it can only be calendar, and that it cant be 12 months. but thats wrong, since it can be either.
User avatar #66 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
If we assumed it's the calendar system the post is referring to you'd be automatically wrong, is it that hard to understand? We can't know for sure if it is or if it's what you claim it is.
User avatar #67 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
and if we assumed your logic is retarded we would be absolutely correct. assuming things is dumber than shit. a pile of feces is smarter than assuming things. assuming something from the content has as much validity as pulling an answer out of your ass. assuming has no place here. get the fuck out with your assuming.
User avatar #69 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
I quit, maybe someone more patient than me can help you out.
User avatar #63 - jewishcommunazi (06/05/2015) [-]
You say you're right and we're wrong and at the same time you admit we're correct unknowingly.
User avatar #65 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
im not saying that it couldnt be calendar, im saying it could either be calendar or 12 months.

you are saying that it cant be 12 months.

it can clearly be either.

you are explicitly incorrect
#54 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
No one is right or wrong in this argument. Since there is no clarification given in the original joke, no one can know whether it means calendar year or a period of twelve months.
User avatar #55 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
ill speak slower. they said it cannot be the second meaning. I said it can. you just confirmed that it can have to meanings. they said it can only have one. i said it can be either. you just confirmed that it can be either.

i dont know what else to say

how many more ways do i have to say this
#60 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
The answer changes depending on whether the original joke was talking about a calendar year or a 12-month period. If they were talking about a calendar year (Everyone there was born in 1992 for example) then you CAN'T be correct, because your example would have two people there being born in two separate calendar years.
User avatar #62 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
there is no clarification. it will forever be unknown whether they meant calendar or just 12 months.

which leaves us with two possibilities. either calendar or 12 months. 5 people have said that it can ONLY be calendar. but it cant. it can be either calendar or 12 months. i have said that it can either be calendar or 12 months. and it can. it can be either calendar or 12 months.

which makes those 5 people incorrect. they refuse the second possibility with no evidence. and it makes me correct.
#68 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
"what 'way'? you were wrong and i showed you how. theres no other 'way' to see it"

In that comment you claimed he was wrong for assuming the joke was referring to a calendar year. However, if the joke IS referring to a calendar year he is correct and you are incorrect, but if the joke is referring to a period of 12-months you are correct and he is incorrect.
User avatar #70 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
a quote from >>#35: "false."

he refused to believe that 12 months is a possibility. i showed him that 12 months is a possibility. he was a smartass (if you see it that way) again refusing the possibility of 12 months. he was incorrect, because 12 months is a possibility.
#71 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
12-months IS a possibility, but that's never what the argument has been about. Your stance (that it refers to both, not that it CAN refer to both. We can determine that your stance refers to both instead of the possibility of either from the fact that you claimed he is wrong, which he isn't if the joke refers only to a calendar year.) is only correct if the joke is referring to both calendar year and 12-months. Since there is absolutely no way of knowing whether it's referring to calendar year, 12 months or both there is no way anyone can be correct or incorrect.
User avatar #73 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
that is not my stance, and i already detailed in >>#70 how you are incorrect there. my stance is that it can refer to both. my stance is not, and never has been, that it refers to both. that is retarded. the two options are separate and it's impossible for it to refer to both.
i disagreed with him because he said that it cant refer to both. i called him wrong because he said it cant refer to both. i said it can refer to both. i LITERALLY NEVER said that it refers to both.

therefore, you are wrong. my stance is that it can refer to both, and since there is no way of knowing which one it is, im right either way.
>>#35, >>#43, >>#42, >>#30, and >>#46's stance it that it can only be referring to calendar, and since there is no way of knowing which one it is, they are wrong.
#81 - dmhhh (06/07/2015) [-]
"A CALENDAR IS TWELVE MONTHS YOU DUMBASS"

My god you're not worth the headache, this is so basic. I sincerely hope you were just trolling or something. Just reread everything I've said and hopefully one day you'll get it, everyone but you has gotten it so far.
User avatar #76 - dorfdorfdorf (06/05/2015) [-]
>>#74 A CALENDAR IS TWELVE MONTHS YOU DUMBASS
#74 - dmhhh (06/05/2015) [-]
"but it isn't. during the same year means 12 months. their parents all fucked within the same twelve months."

In this comment you say with complete certainty that it refers to 12 months, not that it can refer to either a calendar year or 12 months.
#69 - you are not the only one 05/06/2015 on + 0
#117 - I ******* love that album. I want to see them in Copenh… 05/05/2015 on Harram 0
#10 - ******* love this show.  [+] (3 new replies) 04/09/2015 on Ding Dong +39
User avatar #24 - GShock (04/09/2015) [-]
What show?
User avatar #25 - historia (04/09/2015) [-]
Unbreakable
#15 - phonicghost (04/09/2015) [-]
Absolutely, it surprised me how good it was.
#67 - "Wait, is this even legal?"  [+] (9 new replies) 03/28/2015 on Bonding~ +13
#112 - gentlemanofbacon (03/28/2015) [-]
User avatar #89 - shadowkingdr (03/28/2015) [-]
well it's canon so maybe
User avatar #120 - simonjiha (03/28/2015) [-]
explain i must know
User avatar #122 - shadowkingdr (03/28/2015) [-]
in D/P there is a story that long ago pokemon and humans married
User avatar #123 - simonjiha (03/28/2015) [-]
i think i could marry a metagross
#125 - shadowkingdr (03/28/2015) [-]
oh and in the manga there is this little tidbit
#157 - gaybusta (03/28/2015) [-]
#126 - simonjiha (03/28/2015) [-]
#85 - John Cena (03/28/2015) [-]
actually yes, its cannon that people fuck pokemon
#251 - Wait, wait, wait... It's going somewhere. I mean, it really gi… 03/26/2015 on Biotech 0
#114 - true 03/26/2015 on Assorted Internets #6 0
#84 - I'm a creep, I'm a weirdo... but I still would **** her.  [+] (2 new replies) 03/25/2015 on Assorted Internets #6 +2
#111 - corps (03/25/2015) [-]
Well, at least you wouldn't have to worry about her biting your dick when she gives you a blowjob. She wouldn't even have to open her mouth, you could just fuck her tooth holes instead.
User avatar #114 - ottofan (03/26/2015) [-]
true
#32 - Office Gordon, chill out man  [+] (1 new reply) 03/24/2015 on Movie 0
#34 - thegamegestapo (03/24/2015) [-]
Office Gordon, chill out man
chill out man
Chill

Soon
[ 231 Total ]

user's channels

Join Subscribe bendingtime
Join Subscribe fucking-ironic
Join Subscribe funny
Join Subscribe metal-time

user's friends

voggaz
   

items

Total unique items point value: 550 / Total items point value: 600

Comments(0):

 
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)