Flayrah is a Terrible Furry Site - Review

Don't know what happened to it's unique design. It used to have a style for it's title.

Flayrah is a site that delivers news, opinion, reviews, fiction, artwork, and "original" work.
The general motto is "furry food for thought", which is based off "food for thought".

Is Flayrah really an interesting furry site that considers "food for thought" to a lot of people though? Is it a healthy site for communities to be treated as welcoming people? Does it have a fair system for debate? And is the news usually about interesting furry stuff?

No, no, no, and... kinda? For the "kinda" part, it's not exactly what you would expect.

Some Is Interesting, Many Aren't
Many parts of the website does indeed talk a lot about furry stuff, after all, it's a furry focused site, which includes four-legged anthropomorphic characters.
However, I do not agree that just showing a furry art piece is itself interesting, and the sad problem about the site is that most of the posts are usually reviews, news of random crime, and possibly other things with little to no interesting information.
Perhaps maybe at least most of the reviews can have interesting content in them?

Sadly I so far failed to find any interesting criticism in a review I think.
One of the worst reviews I've seen was an Alpha and Omega review (the first movie's) which clearly stifles creativity by trying to call out the designs because it's not the person's thing. One of the worst parts about such review is this:

"Most characters don't stand out on their own in any way; the exceptions are sometimes for the wrong reasons. Eve (Kate's mother), for example, stands out for having a nose at least twice the size of anyone else in the film."

Even though, many movies has always had "wacky" designs on different characters of the same species before. The reason is likely because if you make them look too similar, they won't look as unique.

Many parts of the review does nothing but insult the creator's creativity and then suggesting a message which stifles creativity instead. There is nothing "food for thought" about the review, it's just a person who is being biased and unfair.

Speaking of "biased", another person made another review with a title in reaction to me talking about the subject of "biased" here. Was that one an interesting message? Well, it sounded nothing new, that argument is based upon what most people would think.

I think this should be considered food for thought for example: https://another-realm.deviantart.com/journal/Objective-of-Critiquing-Exists-725881839
Even though it's my article, I still argue it's a good argument despite me not being that good at writing. The article (or journal) linked argues a main belief that has barely been addressed and attempts to show something a lot of people may have never thought of before. It's *ahem*... something to think about, isn't it?

There are some articles that at least try to give criticism, but does that automatically make it food for thought? Are they alone interesting?

The Main Community
What counts as the main community? That would probably be anyone who comments and has an account. Guests might however count too especially if they have an account already. On here though, we may depend on the majority for this one and who is more known and is active. It's really impossible for a website to have everyone who is part of the community to behave the same. There may always be that one person who does disruptive behavior.

When it comes to many active and more known people commenting, it's not so good. Most of the time, it's one sided, and anyone who attempts to criticize a point may cause emotional uproar just like an average social media site where a questionable opinion is more popular than the other and anyone who disagrees will get bashed. In fact maybe, some people act like I wasn't allowed to disagree with a point in a review because they think reviews can't be questioned maybe. This emotional problem can cause drama, and if there is such system, some may attempt to rate comments to a low score out of an irrational mindset instead of an rational one. Some systems can have a "hide" system within it, and many good interesting comments can be hidden while irrational garbage comments gets praised instead. This tries ruins a good healthy relationship within the community.
Another problem is that some members are clearly assholes, as some are more for personal insults.
Yet, another problem is that the site tries to give this illusion of "reputation" and possibly another sense, making many users feel scared of possibly posting interesting criticism. This is perhaps one of the most depressing feelings to ever have on this site, and the main issue here is that some of the major problems mentioned in this sub section of the article may cause such bad feeling.

It's also possible some furries have left the site due to the community problems.

Some Pictures

 NEW UPDATE 12/3/2018:
2cross2afflication straight out spreads dangerous false information.
I'm talking about that area with the claim that I am defending something horrible.

Reacting to a comment that had nothing to do with defending having sex with children.

And there are many people on this website who is part of the agenda that promotes ruining a person's life.

Older:

A user leaving due to Flayrah's problems. I do not want to mention who, and I ask anyone else to not speak of the person's name as I assume the person doesn't want that due to a post I've seen. I do not want to drag this person into drama, thanks.

According to the user (2cross2affliction), I've somehow been rude for... having my own criticism?

Also, to be safe, here is a comment from me regarding that porn:

"And it's not that I "defended" child porn, I was making arguments more around it and some that MIGHT sound a little for it, but I never blatantly defended it.
I just wanted to question stuff like "It creates a demand", "it hurts the victim" and/or that it's treated like it's "rape", all in terms of possession alone. Why? Because those arguments can be bad and compared to a LOT of things that may be legal. Those arguments are horrible and dangerous alone. And hell, I even said I hope the person doesn't possess child porn again."

My comment on top, insulting comment below my comment.

Reaction (bottom comment) to my comment.

Telling me to leave. Possible hypocrisy in comment.

2cross2affliction being a complete dick now on another thread.

Part of one of 2cross2affliction's comments.

Speaking of this person (2cross2affliction), he's admitted he's rude, but I don't know if I'm wrong but to me it's as if he gets to be rude, but I can't... While that's stupid, I still argue many of the things he said is "rude" isn't rude. Anyway, this guy is seriously causing a lot of problems. He even said I'm "no victim" as if that's always the case for his mistakes just because of a mistake I could of done on there for example.

Bottom comment.

Insulting me as a writer.

Again, another insult. Coming from a Pokemon fan who gives direct links to Pokemon pornography on Deviantart.

The Rating System and Why It's Flawed

In some snapshots here on this article, you may noticed a row of stars in the count of 5. It's the rating system, a system that allows members and even guests to vote on a comment and/or article. One star is considered the poorest, and five stars is considered "Awesome".

The problem with this system is that it usually allows others to consider interesting criticism to be considered "poor" while terrible comments get praised. When it comes to emotional subjects, it gets rather abused heavily. If someone for example tried to question the popular belief among the majority of the site, the comment will likely be rated as "poor" (one star), even if you give out good links to studies. When it comes to pages like that, a lot of people there seem to be more irrational than rational. That type of behavior attempts to bash anyone who dares question some beliefs, not only reacting badly, and rating the comments down, but when a comment is rated very down, the comment will be "hidden", and you would have to click on it to actually see it, making it easier to miss the comment, and that's censorship.

Here is a snapshot I already posted to show something that's kinda an example:

Note: I probably voted my own comment because of how unfair it was.

"Poor" votes can also happen due to just hatred for the person and I might be a victim of that too.

Why do we even have a rating system in the first place? It's unfair, and by unfair, I mean in this general problem I'm already trying to address. This rating system can also cause others to be scared to post their opinions and/or good solid points. It's mainly a tool to hide others, a tool that causes fear, and a tool that gets used in an attempt to abuse good points, and/or things that may be interesting in a good way.

The only good thing about it, is that it can also be used as a way to recommend good comments and/or comments not good or bad.

I suggest either one of these improvements for the system:

• Ditched the "low ratings" and make a "like" system instead: Have comments have a "liked", or similar function instead.
• Ditched any rating system.
• Allow others to disable the ratings on their comments and article, publicly. Youtube does this for videos, by the way.

Of course, the only time I'm for deleting a comment entirely is if it was illegal.

Here is something GreenReaper (owner of website) partly said in a comment to me:

"It is also not a zero-sum game: in my experience everyone is able to post comments which are considered good enough not to be folded; but often they choose not to. The rating system provides a consequence to that choice."

Yes, a consequence which causes multiple problems. Fear is one of those things. There can be some pretty bad arguments that is emotionally supported on the site, but due to ratings, some people are afraid to address it. Backlash can also be an issue.
For example, there is an argument claiming something of "Possession of certain porn creates a demand!" and that argument alone is itself a problem. I could say something like:
"That argument is based upon fear, and if merely possessing such porn "creates" a demand, then what about violence in video games? Doesn't that "create" a demand too? What about fictional certain porn? Won't that "create" a demand as well? What if the person possessed it for crime report? After all, the person DID view it after all, which must of effected the view count, "creating" a demand. I find that demand claim to be a poor argument. Demand should be literally mean what it means if I'm thinking right, not fear."
And what happens then? The comment will likely get 1-stared, then folded, and some making empty claims will get praised. I'm also sure 2cross2affliction will call that "wrong" and "evil" because that's what he does. He doesn't respect free speech (or rather naturally since the website may have legal rights to censor it), and he calls that type of disagreements "evil" and "wrong".

There wasn't really any attempt to make any interesting points back in such likelihood example.

Just recently, I wanted to add a bit more stuff GreenReaper very much said recently in 2019 (note: pasting might make layout slightly off):
 

I think you're trying to say there's an objective measure of quality, based on the construction of argument, and therefore if you're making well-reasoned, well-constructed arguments, you should be rated highly. But you're way off base. Quality is in the eye of the beholder. If they don't agree with your argument, they'll consider it to be a poor comment, or at best OK; certainly not great.
If essentially everyone disagrees with a comment, it's terrible and doesn't require further consideration except by the masochistic. That's what folding tries to do: eliminate suck. Non-controversial comments don't suck, or at least not enough to deserve folding. Even controversial ones tend not to fold - just fade, to represent the weakness of their support by the community.

Not only I argued that quality is not in the eye of the beholder, but even another user went in and stand against the idea that it is in the eye of the beholder.
You can probably guess what happened to comments in terms of ratings system.
I got spammed and censored with the effects of low ratings, no matter how well I try to argue why quality is not in the eye of the beholder.

The News
The news is perhaps slightly interesting. Though is that an excuse to judge it, though?
Well, first many news don't seem to offer any interesting points I think.
But at usual, it does it's job at reporting some furry related stuff. The odd part is that I often see crime reports involving children and I'm not so sure if reporting someone for possessing certain porn because the person is a furry does it's job right.

I also think certain news can rather promote harm to the individuals who need help. It's almost as if Flayrah is expecting a furry to be "perfect" and if not, they expose it like it's breaking news.

Conclusion
It's not a healthy furry site. It's more rotten in general. The community in general is poor, especially how part of the community acts to those who disagree with popular opinion, many "food" in some articles is more rotten, the ratings system is unfair, and creates an unhealthy sense by causing fear. The news is perhaps the only slightly thing useful, but even that has problems sometimes.

The worst part about the site is probably the community. Not everyone is doing bad behavior, of course.

2/10

Terrible

Also I don't think I'm so good at article editing. However I hope my article comes out clear enough. Article may get updated and has already been updated at times.

What a Bunch of Bullcrap

The only reason why I still continue this is because of a story which can be found here:
https://another-realm.deviantart.com/journal/JettTheWolf696-and-Criticism-721296199

These days, I normally don't make sub pages of other people. If I needed to add something, I would just add it to a single page if the single page is more of a general post about such person.

Anyway, according to what this article tries to talk about, this is a bunch of lies.

If he wasn't such a hypocrite on that, his post should of probably said something like this:
"Don't get me wrong, I am all for the freedom in voicing ones opinion, unless you think certain thoughts, like fictional cub porn, has certain opinions that are controversial to me, and/or if the expression is fictional child porn that is protected by the first amendment of the USA according to the 18 USC 1466A writing of that Wikipedia section involving the USA..."
And that's only for what I know so far?

Don't pretend you respect people's rights, JettTheWolf696.

That is all.



Also strongly important: Do not go searching child porn of any kind. That can get you into big trouble. If you are found guilty, you may not only get some form of punishment, but also be added to the sex offender registry for either life, or less (depends).

Exposing Channeleven Further

This is a copy and paste from Area's journal as he said he wanted to back it up, but still wanted the truth exposed somewhere, so I will take this request and put it out.

======================

The man (Channeleven) tried and attempt to find "my" Facebook again. After seeing an updated URL, I went onto Facebook and warned the person about this just now.


The fact that you (Peter) are so obsessed with finding personal information about people like that shows why you always been causing trouble (So I decided to do this back to you).

The fact that he won't leave me alone with his stalking, then I'm just going to move accounts much sooner than I planned to.

And yes, trying to find someone's Facebook (especially for a second time) and showing a link after doing that, IS stalking AND harassment.

And to viewers, THIS FOLKS, is why I can't stop talking about my stalker here.
Again, thanks a lot you horrible monster (Channel), thanks for showing that you still support actual stalking and obviously harassment. How do you like it if someone found all your personal crap that you try to hide REM and shown it on an article getting thousands of views? How would you like it if a certain someone uploads a picture of your house, and say bullshit crap like "Someone seeing a picture of this isn'tz stalkinz" as if the person who said that isn't stalking?
Yes, he said that to that Facebook link and hiding the fact that he's the one that advocated a link based off his stalking.


UPDATE:
The person replied: He said that he is very disgusted how this person tried to find his Facebook again, he may request Google to change the URL again and that he's very upset not only at this horrid stalker, but also to Google for failing to protect privacy settings to avoid people finding it.
--

I hope you go to jail for avoiding privacy protection, Peter.

Also, this isn't the first time I've talked about Facebook and Peter/Channeleven.
http://wwwarea.deviantart.com/journal/HOLY-F-K-UPDATE-UPDATE-563327601

======================== 

The only difference is that I had to replace this last part at the bottom due to the way it was linked. I replaced it with a normal link.

Also, in other news, I had another article request posted called "As far as I can go" and it had a picture of a random house, said to be 'by REM's house' but due to some second thoughts, I've decided to save it as draft for now.

I still have the image on here and I may share it with certain people.

One Reason why 'wwwarea' won't let go of REM

 Of course, REM is the one that wouldn't let go of him in the first place.
Well after some research, I figured out that REM has yet, started another fight with 'wwwarea'. Seems he really has not let go of him in the end. Even though he said he would in a way at another area.

Requested:

===========================

Oh REM, why do you have to start fights with me again as you usually do? (E.g. How he starts journals against me for making journals not even directed at him)

So anyway, seeing this:

Proves further as to why Channeleven start fights.

For anyone's information, another person started a fight with me in this thread by claiming I was a "heterophoboa" and said other bad things.

Granted, I find 'common' heterosexual gross, but I do NOT discriminate them.

After explaining myself, and after some days, Channel (of course) came along and started posting more slandering and other bullshit about me once again.

Oh and by the way, here is a snapshot of the main thing that started a fight.

Name censored due to that possibly being a real person, but out of misunderstanding. But it was meant to be directed at me in attempt.

Why do people have to make the world more shitty?

Also, there was a recent post about me explaining something against non-sense and stupidity that Channeleven claims.

http://multiversefeeling.blogspot.com/2015/12/more-like-you-picked-fight-re-extreme.html

And as usual, you will still stalk me and continue to post shit about me maybe.

When will people like you learn?

=================

Request done

I wonder if REM is going to claim "stalking" over something that started fights with 'wwwarea'?

More like 'you' Picked a Fight - RE: EXTREME Non-sense

Ah yes, the classic case of bigotry, and insane non-sense from that Channeleven guy, followed by some insane stupidity comments following along it too.

Request used:

===============================

Oh Channel, again with the non-sense and idiotic followers (At least some of them).

Found this here:

http://channeleven.deviantart.com/journal/I-tried-576402840

I haven't talked about wwwarea in ages, and now he decides to pick a fight with because I was trolling Sponge (that ROBLOX guy I talked about in past journals).

Picked a fight? Who's the guy who's been picking and starting fights with me about furry defending, spiritual beliefs, and so on?
And who's the guy who recently picked a fight and use "autism" as insulting names, and so on?

Me and Funnel have left wwwarea alone, yet he continues to obsess over the both of us.

Because of what you did before. You were the ones obsessed with me and starting fights with me (including others) in the first place.
I'm not going to say that it's "my fault", but in terms of 'focusing on users': Me, you, funnel, and some others are no different.

Since it no longer matters whether or not anyone leaves him alone, a response to the blog is possible.

Just like you with me, including with other people.

It'll be posted here, and it'll be posted on my blog in case he tries to report it, because we all know wwwarea is flag-happy.

And this justifies my claims about you with this 'possibility' you seem to put over me.

Oh, to wwwarea, I'll be waiting for you to stalk my page and respond to this.

The cringe is SO REAL.
You been stalking my blog, my profile, and possibly other places for weeks and months, and you even try to find my Facebook account.
Not only the cringe coming from you is so real, but you make people sheep and act like you're the "victim" after all the shit you did to me, my friend, and other people.

UPDATE: Still determining if I should respond. People claim he just wants attention, but even if I don't give it to him, he'll still whine. It won't matter what any of us do.

I feel like you are trying to act like me when I expose what you do.
How much stupidity and sadness does this world needs from you?

========================= 

Request done.

My goodness, that was the most stupidest non-sense I've ever seen.

To help further prove 'wwwarea's points:

Here:
http://wwwarea.deviantart.com/journal/HOLY-F-K-UPDATE-UPDATE-563327601

http://wwwarea.deviantart.com/journal/Why-I-Didn-t-Start-the-Drama-or-Dramas-564166964

http://multiversefeeling.blogspot.com/2015/08/remradioheadfan96-or-channeleven-history.html

There is many more where this came from!

It's beyond insanity for him to act like 'wwwarea' is going to stalk him and so, considering he (Channeleven) is the one that has been monitoring 'wwwarea' and me for weeks and months before!

Including the fact that Channeleven has always been picking fights with 'wwwarea''s for some of his stamps and journals.

What a sad Messed up User

 UPDATE: Removed the word "legit" down there. Might of used a label I probably didn't understand well. UPDATE DONE.

 

Well I got another request.. and I can't believe my eyes to see such an idiot act so selfish toward 'wwwarea'.

Request Used:

===============================

This user is really disgusting.. Not surprisingly though, it's an old user.

Here is the whiny journal: http://jaredthefox92.deviantart.com/journal/Here-We-Go-Again-574133499

Anyways Jesse replied to my criticism of his journal as expected. I contemplated not replying to said reply to my response to his journal, however I have to prove him dead wrong now.

"Because I said so."

Now beyond this, I'll add this note:
Within the quote spacing, the black text in this style (example) are his. Messages before it are most likely mine from earlier commentaries.

Like I said, I have stalkers, but I will respond to this one because of it's stereotypical promote and discrimination." (Not like you don't watch both Funnel and myself all the time, even in our comment sections Jesse. Also you're the one stereotyping us autists as 'gifted' or 'cool' without even knowing the trials that many of us go through on a daily basis. You think that we like being abnormal, misfits, and for the most part hindered from enjoying many things in life just because you find your own depression 'cool'? Who is the stereotyping individual now Jesse?  )

 Not like you do the same thing in the first place.
No I'm not. Then again, it could be ARGUED as one in a certain type of argument (as I already explained why).
Abnormal and misfits are just man-made terms.. And just because you don't feel comfortable because you feel "awkward" that doesn't mean it's a disease.
You are still the stereotyping because you claim that it's all a "bad" thing, etc.
And I wasn't saying suffering it's self is better, but I'm saying that being outside of a comfort zone can ALSO lead to better things, arguing that the thing we all have is simply a thing we have.
Perhaps it's not good or bad. It all depends.

"Don't know who 'Jesse' is but seriously? "Debunk"? Do you speak for all people then by forcing your own stereotypical thoughts over everyone else?" (Everyone knows your name now Jesse, heck Peter has even told me about your sister who used to be on DA. Also you already revealed that we know your facebook page so yeah, quite with the charade. I know more about Autism than you ever will Jesse. I've been around people who have more problems and issues with their lives than you ever will, people with cerebral palsy, dyslexia, littoral man-children who can't even comprehend washing their hands or locking the bathroom stall door. You know nothing of special needs Jesse, I've been around all types of autists on the spectrum and I know way more about the issue of autism and our problems than you ever could.)

No you didn't. I don't think I have a sister on DA. You could be mistaking a comment that said "brother" before when I do remember back then, we ha a fake family thing, where it's not actually a 'family'. I didn't say it was exactly my Facebook.

No you don't actually.
Did you know though, that their is TYPES of 'autism'? Did you ever think of that?
I know it plenty well..
I know that everyone autistic is different for each and every individual and I am also aware that the term 'autism' has been stereotyped to describe 'different' personalities as "autism" when it's not.

"That's to some people. Thanks for stereotyping that everyone is the same" (No Jesse, that is life. I've been around these people, many of them were my friends in middle school and high school. I've been around people who have it way worse than both you and I combined. It's not 'stereotyping' when I've been around these people for six years of my life. Also not once did I ever mention that 'everyone was the same', that is just some silly thing you made up in your mind.)

 You act like every 'autistic' is the same. When in reality, they are not.

First of all, everyone is normal for being different. Second, just because it bothers some, doesn't mean it bothers all.
You don't speak over everyone else who thanks their own "disorder".(I never said they weren't, however your version of 'different' is basically them getting pity from others and not trying to strive to bring normality into their lives, you want people to be treated like Chris Chan instead of working for this sense of normality. My version is people  facing adversity and hardship stand firm in the face of their problems and try their best to make some sort of attempt to become as normal and functioning in society as they can. Take it from someone who had to do so in real life. The only people who 'thank' their disorder are those who have worked well enough to become productive members of society despite it. )

Again, you seem to dictate by sharing the illusion that their is a single "normal". When in reality, everyone is born to experience unique stuff. If you hate Chris JUST because he has a different personality, then you are a sad asshole yourself. I am not defending his actual mistakes, but that was another point..
Not everyone wants to be a "normal" functioning part of society.
Some people are introverts, some are asocials, etc. and it seems you force that those lives are "bad" and that they must be like other people, your an asshole.
I'm an asocial and a introvert, and it's quite possible that I could have a 'AS' but not noticed, and I do not want to be forced to be an annoying extrovert.

Also did you know that most of the suffering isn't caused by 'autism' sometimes? A lot of that is because of the discrimination of society (The lack of support) for those who are more different.

You don't own the term over everyone else, and it's very offensive of you to say that others with it who thinks different "don't count" and/or that they must "not speak up".(I never stated I owned the terms autism or aspergers, I know the later of the two was named after Dr.Hans Asperger. First off, you're the one who isn't counting the majority of people who have life even more difficult for themselves due to autism&aspergers. Second, I never in my life would say that anyone with autism 'don't count' or that they 'don't speak up'. That is simply rubbish for me as an legally diagnosed aspie to even contemplate with my fellow autists.)

No but you act like you do.
First of all, I am not saying those who suffer and is in need of help should not get help, if they want help, they can get help. But I CAN argue that you can't cure what's inside of your head.
Second, well you have a problem for those who treat it as a gift.

"You remind me of that website that sometimes censor other autistic people for speaking up about some stuff." (Right right, because me being an actual autist, as well as  myself being a proponent for helping autists make the best out of themselves is 'censorship'. Boy what a sad and strange little world you live in Jesse, and you don't have my pity. ) 

 The way you talk sounds like you are saying that "autism is horrible, and a curse, we must cure it, etc".
That's what reminded me of that website too.
Do you have any idea how offensive that sounds to parents and etc. of autism?
There are a lot of parents who accept them for who they are, etc.

2. A spelling error doesn't make someone stupid.(True, but I must say you've already have done that to yourself.)

Keep telling yourself that.

"That still doesn't mean anything. Being more intelligent is still good for those who enjoy it, and everyone can get depressed off of something."(Only the true simple minded would ever believe that intelligence leads to more happiness. The more you know about the world the more you understand the danger, the uncertainty, and the cynical nature of it correct? That would explain a lot of your fantasies Jesse.) 

 "true simple minded". What the fucking hell does that mean? This reminds me of the whole "true fan" crap.
I already understand the danger, and while I understand it, that's why I am a huge fan of activist, change, etc.

"They are probably not depressed because they have it, but more about what they are thinking about.
When someone thinks and studies a lot, of course stress may came, and etc." (Ha! HA! HA! Patrik and myself hardly think about our Autism when talking and we both are depressed as ever worried about issues in Europe, our different ideological stances, and theism  vs atheism all the time. I know Darkminster can be depressed all the time and he rarely even brings up his aspergers unless we get into a forced discussion about it.)

That's a personal reason. I have a lot of worries about certain subjects myself too, and I thank that because it will cause me to be more of an activist for certain change. If I suffer, I am suffering because of the fear and issues that goes on, due to future and uncertainty.
People having all this is a possible lead to being smart.

 "And stop speaking for every single person out there." (The irony and hypocrisy of this sentence is so thick I could use it to snuggle up with a blanket this winter.)

"Autism Asperger is a problem because I know only some people who has it that suffers". <Your basic message in a nutshell.
 Yet, it's ALSO possible that even the people who has it (I can include my self for other labels) couldn't understand why they have this, when it's possible to self-therapy why one is upset so much.
Remember, the label "mental illnesses" is not scientifically proven.
Sometimes I hear that 'autism is a disability' but HIGH functioning sounds like the opposite.

"To some people, it is more better, to some it's not. Stop saying "we aspies", I believe that's very offensive." (I'm sorry Jesse, when you are professionally diagnosed with aspergers via the recommendation of your school and parents then maybe you may have the privilege to tell me to stop referring to people facing the same issues I face on a daily basis.)

It's possible that a lot of people suffer now is because of the way they are treated due to the labeling.
Again, I say possible. A lot of the stuff could be based off many hidden reasons..
And also, when you say "we aspies" you are saying "we" as in every single person in the world who has it. A lot of people do not agree with you.

"Umm yes, again, you are stereotyping people and I find it extremely offensive of you to tell others who is 'diagnoses' to not stand up for themselves, etc." (Once more, I stand for people to stand up for themselves and make the best they can with the cards they're dealt , also how I love it how the person without Autism is telling the person with autism that he's 'offending' autistics. )

Well, just because you have it, doesn't mean you speak for the rest of them.
It doesn't matter if I'm one or not. If you get to stand for others, so can anyone else.

"So for that, screw off." (You first mate. )

You started it by reacting to a journal that wasn't directly addressed to you.

"And I know what I'm doing, it's you that don't know. You seem to think that people who has what you have are all the same." (Oh really? Tell me how you've spent six years dealing with people of the same issues you have, as well as with others who have issues that are far worse than yours. Such as being blind or not being able to move their entire body except their eyes and their mouths. I digress though, also I don't think that. In fact I know of many autists who have it far worse than myself and this fills me with nothing but sympathy for them. Well except one guy, but he was like you and a jackass for using his autism as way to get people to feel pity for him and basically not trying to instead strive to work as many others have in adapting and dealing with society. Guess who? )

I've been hearing about it somewhere in my life too. Yet, people can still research. A while back ago, I've found articles about it, and had an open mind with it, etc.
I know that major issues are found in 'low functioning' people, but far less with 'high functioning' people. I've seen people who were like that.
Did you know that 'High Functioning' was removed from that book? I think people may finally be treating those who are just high functioning as a "normal" part of life, but probably with more abilities due to 'HIGH' functioning..

"Again, that's just a term, man made theory. What is an "overload"?" (Here, you just proven you know little about aspies and autists, a overload, or a meltdown is when we autists get so much sensory input or negative emotions built up inside that we basically lose it. It's not a tantrum, once it happens there is no stopping it and it must run it's course. Sort of like a chain reaction in the brain if you will. However we need to be isolated and calm down and let it all out or we may become violent or even self-destructive. )

I know about meltdowns, but at the same time, I call it an anger issue. Super emotions can happen to other people without the label too.
When I you said 'overload', I thought you were referring to the brain getting so-called "too" much information..
Also, not every 'autistic' has this not fully explained problem.

Another problem is that a lot of people with anger issues were labeled one sadly.

"And not everyone wants to be that "normal"."(You've never been in a classroom with special ed kids before then Jesse. )

Are you talking about those kids in wheel chairs and those who has a lot of other issues?
You seem to suggest that all autistic people are the same again.

You want to know why I say that? Because I've seen more people with 'autism' than you.

Stop saying that people must be changed to be "normal", a lot of people take that as very offensive, and you really need to stop stereotyping them and acting like everyone must be changed for something they are born with.(Once more, sounds like you didn't even listen to what I've said. I want people to change themselves for the better, that isn't changing people, it is them taking the initiative to do so for their own sake.)

Cool, more links to something I've known all my life.

Sounds more like you. You think I think you support 'Autism Speaks' when all I said you reminded me of it.
And that's still kinda the same, plus the idea of 'better' is very subjective these days.

Since when is it better to force HF people to be Mid-F? Knowing that HF can have positive results (Very smart), I wouldn't want to get rid of that if I had it. Even if it can have risks (like anything).
Albert Einstein was HF, and if he was so-called "cured" or didn't have it, he wouldn't be like he was before.

"You don't speak over me." (On my page I do. )

And on my page, I speak over you then. I guess due to it being my page (or on this blog with permission), I can speak over your autism then.

"You have your own problems, and I have my own. Don't speak your bigoted mind over my own. You are the one treating your crap as "facts" over everyone else not you."(Yep, I do have my own problems, because I have autism, you don't, and what you say is only some rubbish you've regurgitated over the internet. Once more, actually live with Autism before you go running your fingers on the keyboard to speak about it Jesse.) 

You don't need to live with it in order to make a debate.
I already know the fact that a lot of people with 'autism' thanks it, and are happy with it due to the positive sides of the so-called "disorder".
Regardless if I am one or not, people can still study it, and understand the fact that maybe labels are bad, that we should just focus on that it's neither bad or good, but rather a tool. That some people could be born with it, etc.

"Also, people can argue that certain "disabilities" can be good even if it makes them suffer. BUT ONLY in terms like; "Sad can be an important tool even though some people can suffer, and some can't. It all depends."(Still they suffer, and I personally would say I would like to be normal and not suffer than suffer, as would just about any person with a disability I've met in the real world would say.)

Getting out of a comfort zone is also a form of suffering, but we need that kind of suffering IN ORDER to gain new ideas, ways, etc.
If we never had any form of non-comfort, then we wouldn't be here.
Have to remember that suffering it's self doesn't always mean "mental illness" but rather based off what you think.
And your last part? So every person who has a "disability" doesn't want it? I don't know about that...

"So before you think it's not the same as saying those people who DO suffer don't count, but this is more of a biological argument. " (Everyone suffers with a disability Jesse, some just suffer in different ways than others.)

People suffer without it. Plus do you know what a DISability means?
Is 'HIGHER' functioning a "lack" of ability?
Also, it can be argued that suffering isn't always based off "illness" but rather, something natural.
I suffer from certain things, but I believe it would be bad to get rid of the effects due to positive sides existing.

Which also makes me reason that the term 'mental illness' doesn't exist.

"Saying my own "label" is cool doesn't violate anyone's rights." (Never said it did, just that it's ignorant and you don't know anything about Autists. )

It's not ignorant if you had a "disability" and say it was cool. Because that person with it counts.

"Actually no, everyone is a "special" snowflake, being different IS NORMAL. Plus, saying they are not cool makes you a special snowflake if I had to agree with you."(Yes, everyone is 'special' in their differences, but what you want Jesse is pity and praise where it clearly isn't deserved. Also once more, being 'cool' is quire irrelevant when discussing serious life issues such as disabilities. You must think it's 'cool' going deaf, blind, or unable to move your own body properly. ) 

You saying it's "not" deserved is arguable and isn't a fact.
And if I had that, then yes I have a right to find it cool, but that doesn't mean anything bad.
If someone is born with an ability that has extra abilities for example, then it's fair to find it cool. Even if it was lack. That's not the same as morally arguing that they have more rights, but it is fair to say that 'more is cool' if the individual finds it cool in a personal thanks idea.

If I was born with the ability to fly, then yes I will find it cool because it's a legit thing I have and it's mine. Not yours.
If you say that's "special snowflake" as bad, then it justifies even more that the term "special snowflake" is just a stupid idiotic troll term.
Yet, you probably don't know what a 'special snowflake' really is.

People with extra abilities are not morally better, but people have a right to find having those cool.

Oh and just because it's considered a 'disability' doesn't mean it's not cool to EVERYONE who has it. Same with the other way around.

"You are the only one being egotistical."(Just look at my comment section and see what others think. )

Depending on popularity now?

"It's my personal life, and it's not yours. It's not "ego" to defend myself and speak my mind." (This went from your biased opinion on autists such as myself to basically you taking it personally, as usual. Where is your 'facts' about Autism now Jesse?) 

It's not biased. But yours is often.
All I did was argue and debate, like anyone.
Where are your facts?

And why did you ignore the links?

"The only egotistical thing that's happening are assholes like you."(Once more, I can use this irony and hypocrisy to make a nice snuggy blanket for me. It's so thick, perfect for making blankets. ) 

You saying a man-made term of disability is always bad when not every autistic agrees makes you an asshole.

"I didn't make ignorance nor bad choices despite a couple of legit mistakes. And again, you blame me for others choosing to do this to me." (Not sure if victim complex or just a really bad case of narcissism. )

Again with that word, just because you think it is, doesn't mean it is.
But you are promoting narcissism though.
And if you start making a journal against me, then I am a victim.

"Maybe it's because that crap isn't constructive criticism, but instead it's actually 'Brutal Honesty' as I heard from another user before." (Oh no, we can't have honesty now can we Jesse? That don't do at all now will it? I'm sorry, but aren't you one of those alternative media 'truth seekers'? Are you telling me you can't handle the truth no matter how brutally honest and inconvenient it is? )

Do you know what 'Brutal Honesty' means? And thanks for admitting that "honest" is the same as "criticism" when it's not.

You claiming your opinion is "truth" because you said so, doesn't make it truth.
Maybe you can't handle the truth from a lot of those sites, and one popular word is that they talk about people making people sheep, and you're a classic example.

"I block people for good reasons." (Yeah, anyone who doesn't say what is on your agenda or speaks out against you.)

Not true on everyone.
And speaking against me? Well that can be a good reason sometimes. No different than homophobia, heterophobia, fetishphobia/etc.

 That's different. That belongs in the line of "fans, murderers, robbers, internet users, gamers, seekers, etc." That's basic dictionary.
Oh and if 'humanaboo' is a stupid label, so is 'wolfaboo' (Oh, it's different when only you think it is, but the rest of the internet doesn't? How fickle of you. I find them both stupid, but sadly for you wolfaboo exist on the internet and there is nothing you can do to change that. )

More like "It's the same because I think it is" <You
It's the same because it fits well with a fair describing thing.

And sadly for you, humanaboo exist on the internet and there is nothing you can do to change that.
Oh, and that whole bullshit of "you can't do anything about it". An average sheep who doesn't believe in change, when history proved it.

"Again, the overused word of "ego". The only egoistic person is you Jared." (Wow! This blanket is so thick it's like it is made of iron! I shall patent this, call it "The Iron Irony Blanket." Rolls off your tongue doesn't t? )

This is why you can't argue.

"That's my post. That person was acting very offensive, calls me "ego" for defending myself with depression, and other labels that I didn't even talk about."(Yet you are not even autistic, nor have you ever had actual experiences with actual autists. I was being very 'offensive' on giving you a real life enlightenment about what is truly means to have Autism. Calls you ego? You mean I called you egotistical Jesse? Also this journal you made wasn't about your depression, it was you trying to act like you know everything about autism when clearly you don't know a hill of beans about autism. )

You don't know my life about experiencing. Plus I say it's offensive because you don't speak over the rest of autistic and no, you do not need to be an autistic to say that. Also, it's "autistics", not "autists".
What the hell is a "true" autistic? It's like you are the one that doesn't know what it really is.
You make a journal acting like you know everything when you don't.

Clearly, you are no different, in fact, you seem more less open minded about autism than I do..

"Apparently this person supports stereotyping and censorship to those who speak their mind and defending. Who's the real egotistic?"(These Iron Irony blankets will sell like hotcakes this winter, pun intended! Though seriously Jesse, what do you think I'm doing hm? I'm telling you the full story about how us 'oppressed' autists truly feel. Once more, you don't have autism and I do. I know more about just by experience than you ever will.) 

And just because you have it, doesn't make your opinion anymore stronger than someone who doesn't have it.
And just because you have it, doesn't mean it's OK to speak to every single person who has a similar type.

"I can't believe this guy says that 'autism' is a "curse", a "disease", etc. I mean he acts like it is, and it reminds me of that horrid 'Autism Speaks' fear ad stuff."(Here we are,  first off I never will in my entire life ever condone Autism Speaks. They are a bunch of euginics nuts who don't even have any autists in their staff. Autism Speaks, but I ain't listening! Second, what I've clearly stated above is that I believe people need to work their hardest through adversity to overcome their issues and make somewhat of a normal life in society for themselves, at least to the best of their capabilities.)

Not everyone wants to be an extrovert. A lot of people accept their lives as the way they live. Plus, you can't ever make an introvert to an extrovert, they are born with it. So just like 'autism', you can't make their lives change all the time..
Yet, some 'autistic' could just be introvert, but a big example problem is that people has been stereotyping autism a lot.

"Anyway, everyone is different. Some people thank their "label" and some people don't like it. However, biological arguments can still apply and either way, to those who do suffer and don't like it, there is NOTHING wrong with trying to get help. But to say that it's "bad" it's self. That's speaking to everyone and yet, that could still be arguable in a biological way." (Most don't, true, there is nothing wrong with seeking help for issues. However one must also try to help themselves first, this is where you falter Jesse. You don't even try to change yourself for the better, you just want to go down like a sinking ship without trying to patch up the holes. You are just like Chris, using your disability as a mere card for pity and sympathy.This is coming from someone with the same disability you've been stating you know about, when clearly you don't.)

One must? Who said so? A god somewhere? Or the cult of society?
I don't need to change myself for the "better" because I am already better. Their is that 'narcissism' as you say that's only from you. You say I am "bad" because you said so when in reality, I never did anything wrong in general.

Actually no I'm not. If someone HAS a 'disability', they have a right to defend it as it is.
It's not the same as saying it's an excuse to be an ass.. even though I wasn't being an ass either.
And maybe YOU are using your 'disability' as a mere card then too.
BUT it is an excuse for certain things because certain 'disabilities' due lack certain things.

"Like for example again: I can suffer from a depression, but I can still argue that it can be OK to have it because depression can have the possibility to lead to better things. Know what I mean?"(Once more, you go off your intended topic to bring it all about yourself, way to use a strawman autism argument to further your own agenda. )  

Strawman?
Who's the one who says it's bad to treat suffering as good and who's the one who treat that "disorders" are always bad, no matter what those people who 'has them' thinks?

---------------

Another reason why these people lost.

By the way, here are the links the person possibly ignored:
aspergers101.com/aspergers-syn…
www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/wel…
www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/wel…

===========================

End of Request

He lost the Argument - Not that he Didn't lost Before

Well it appears that major bigot Funnel (who claims he/she knows everything) has given up..?

Funnel never could argue properly anyway and was completely biases to even count as a 'normal debate'.

But in this article (since Funnel started it with 'wwwarea' several times before), it's just going to react to that too, and to see how this bigot likes it too whenever someone keeps monitoring the person.

Request Used

===============================

Well, here is that whiny journal!
http://funnelvortex.deviantart.com/journal/I-m-done-I-m-fucking-done-571802697

I'm just gonna react to it not only to avoid more bullshit about me, and other bullshit, but to see how he likes it when someone does this to him.

NOTE: The within quote spacing that's bold his his.

Is he so desperate to "own" me that he stays up all night constantly refreshing my page?

I should be saying that to you for the blog.

Im done with this argument!

Hmm...

 And do you know what, Wwwarea? you believe that Sonic is fucking real and you think that it is perfectly reasonable to think you can transform into your Sonic FC.

Or not.
Anyway, you can't seem to understand why I said that, you deny why certain people believe that it's possible. And you act like it's not possible just because you said so.
You even claim you know everything about past lives (I.e. Your bigoted stamp claiming people were never reincarnated to the wolf animal). when you really don't know souls and past lives.

And also, pick up a textbook. Read. Find out why things like polygamy are considered taboos.

The reason why they are taboos are bullshit.

And you know what? You are one of the worst people I know. Why? Because you think it is okay to fuck animals. You think it's alright to fuck animals.

Because of the evidence, sometimes not only consent is possible, but even animals rape other humans.
I'm just saying because of the open mind I have about taboo debates.
And you saying "it's rape anyway" is just why I just love to question taboos.

I am not a "bad" person for agreeing to something different than you.

You are a bad person though.

And you know what else makes you a shithead? You think rape is not a big deal. You think that it is alright to be like PaulandAmy because PaulandAmy "only" hurt a few people. He raped them. And if you don't think we should be concerned about people like him, then you need to wake up.

Now the insulting comes. Eeeek, I'm so excited.
I never once said that. I guess you didn't read that last article. However, it's NOT as bad as murder though.

You clearly misunderstood me. I was not defending what he did. I was saying it's possible to forgive a mistake (Plus, where is the proof he raped people?) and be like "don't do it again".. When it comes to people who did a mistake and REGRET, what the fuck is wrong with forgiving the person and giving the person more chances?

And no, just because Science can't explain everything doesn't mean that you can just make up bullshit to make it seem like it can. Science can not explain politics, religion, or philosophy. You can't just make up crap to make it seem like science can explain those.
And the universe was not created with magic quantum vibratory mind powers. Thoughts do not create reality. And you live in the same world as the rest of us. Stop listening to pseudoscientists and pick up an actual science book.

 Who said so? You?
Actually, science can prove stuff that religion claims to exist, and the evidence is real. You can't just decide that it's not, and act like "They can never prove it!" just because you said so.
Sorry but you are wrong, just because you said it's "wrong", that it's "pseudoscience" doesn't mean it is.

I remember this:
http://wwwarea.deviantart.com/journal/Interesting-569799929

And of course!
http://multiversefeeling.blogspot.com/2015/09/well-i-won.html

www.goodreads.com/quotes/16120…
www.collective-evolution.com/2…
www.shift.is/2013/04/does-matt…

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPepr…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10451983/Do-we-live-in-the-Matrix-Scientists-believe-they-may-have-answered-the-question.html

http://www.thecivilian.co.nz/dreams-are-real-say-scientists/

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/12/05/the-illusion-of-matter-our-physical-material-world-isnt-really-physical-at-all/"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOBT-TVAhM4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGAo5uLCPio

http://juicenothing.blogspot.com/2012/05/undeniable-proof-that-law-of-attraction.html

https://masteryofself.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/a-step-by-step-law-of-attraction-system-to-win-the-lottery-my-complete-secret-theta-method-revealed/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

That's not 'pseudoscience'. It's real science, new scientific theories, experiences, etc.
If you claim it's not real, YOU need evidence that it's not. If you do not have evidence, then guess what Funnel?
You are making a claim that is pure biases and pure pseudoscience.

And you know why I don't take your sources seriously? It is because all the links you post go to websites that are either opinionated or biased. Draw from neutral sources when debating a political topic.

Your journals are opinionated, also every article is an 'opinion', but that doesn't automatically mean it's wrong. Opinions can have better evidence than the other.
And it's not biased.
You clearly just won't listen to the criticism.
Every time someone sends you an article with evidence, good explanations, history, you just yell out "BIASED!!!!", "WRONGZ", and you depend on 'Who', 'Where', 'Why', and 'Popularity'.
When you can't take any of the links and make up bullshit like that, then you automatically lost the debate.

You are the craziest, most deluded, and most ignorant man I know. If you think ancient aliens visited earth and helped human civilization, then you are a bit delusional. If you think Sonic is real then you are probably nuts. But if you think it's okay to fuck animals, then there is something horribly wrong with you.

Because you said so? Where is the evidence that I am "wrong", where is the evidence that you are "right"?

You are the bigot and most craziest, and delusional bigot I've ever seen.. Well I mean the second most of those.

You just say what you want and act like that's "proof" and expect someone to prove you wrong (No, wait, you can't accept that either) and act like you do not need to prove your claims.

You think it is alright to fuck animals.

And you think rape is no big deal.

Go. Get. Help!

3 times for the first part. Again, you just can't stand it when someone has a different opinion than you that is linked with less controllable emotions then you.

You misunderstood me.

And I do not need to get help by depending on evidence and having a different opinion than you.



Oh yeah, I should add this at the end of this article.
I do not promote bestiality (legal term?). If I did, I would of had actual sex with non-human animals and/or tell others to do that.

Though I heard that it's meant to be on non-consenting side. But I did not have sex with them. And I don't even think I want to.

================= 

End of request.

Commentary - You don't know Everything Beyond - NOT FINISHED YET

Will this guy just cut it out?
You know those kind of people who act like they know everything beyond when they really don't, and ignore all evidence that denies their puny brains? That's Funnel in a nutshell.
It's quite sad how this person just thinks he/she knows everything when in reality, the person doesn't and will use their nut job dumb emotions and bitch out because of it and act like all the evidence were never their and acts like Funnel's little world is "concrete" or even "evidence".

 Request Used

========================

 The fuck is wrong with Funnel? True, the emotional faggotry of his mind seems that it can't handle open theory and suggest something a rabid atheist would do; claim God "doesn't" exist just because.
I am not saying a stupid Hedgehog is my god, but the way Funnel goes reminds me of rabid atheists.
Or rabid creationists who claim certain things without proof.

http://funnelvortex.deviantart.com/journal/commentary-SONIC-IS-NOT-REAL-part-1-571695641

Note: Of course, within quote spacing: The deeper quote spacing is his, the main quote spacing without the bold is mine and the bold messages in the quote spacing is his again (But recent).
Note again: Some of my own quotes he posted within the quotes pacing may have some bold stuff too.
Also, the deeper quote spacing with bold words are most likely Funnel's too.

He kinda connects now due to this one being more connected before.. And hey, remember the whole stupid Sonic.EXE thing that didn't connect..?

It did not connect but you freaked out over it anyway.

Oh no, it did. But you are the guy that's talking about a Sonic.exe thing that didn't connect at all.

USED TO BE. I mean, this wasn't my account originally. That's why you see those fucking requests because of a talk.

Are you pretending this isn't your blog?

It was pretty much owned by "me" and the other guy, but the other guy was the main leader.

Again, you seem to tell others how to live and again, you act like I always never even touch my front door nob.
If you keep making stuff up out of assumption then I will just keep saying the same thing to you then.

Just come out and be honest and say WHAT you do outside of your house! It isn't that hard.

You will never know me.
Plus let me assume you don't. You write these replies even on School days. Soooooo

 Maybe my world view can sometimes promote it.
Every activist, idealist, etc. has a world view that has promoted freedom.
And see you whine and complain about someone who believes in change is pretty sad.

Change for what, exactly? And idealism is not always good. Often people bring up ideas for prosperity in society with good intentions, and sometimes it turns into something awful. 

The problem with you is that you act like 'idealism' and so is "ALWAYS" bad.

And those people that think is "right" or "wrong" are not always right.

Yes, but not in the way you think of it. You think "right" is what everyone else says is "wrong". And for no good reason either.

Sorry but face it. You can't prove that. What is right is respecting Freedom of Expression that's not violating an actual freedom, and another right is protecting freedom in general.
And you act like that's "wrong" just because you said so.

The Golden Rule is clear, it's also been used so long in the history. Even though it's also the most violated rule in the world.

There is still laws today based off unfair emotional discrimination (E.g. Polygamy laws)
If the future really do gets more perfect, then I'll say you are jumping too far beyond our current times.

Basically you just said I am the smart one here.

Think again.. You can't seem to understand the speech.
I was saying you were acting like our current times were "perfect" now, but they are not.
In another part, I was saying if the future does get perfect, you are in the wrong time and only in the future of that.

The only stupid things that's being said is words (in certain orders) out of your mouth.
And if you say shitty things about people not you, expect people to say something back.

Didn't I just say that?

You pointed it at the wrong person. :)
 Again, if for example, YOU say something, expect people to say something back.

Yet, some speech is banned in some places.

Free speech isn't banned here. So stop acting like it is.

Look at the rules on DA.
Look at 'Hate Speech' laws.
Look at 'Obscene speech' laws.
Look at policies.

I do not need to link you to them.. You can easily find at least one of those maybe. Lazy.

No. Just kissing or any other common stuff.
If Vore bothers you, then most things must bother you then.

Vore can be disturbing to some simply because it involves one eating another.

And Kissing can be disturbing to some simply because it involves germs and mouth to mouth.
Again, others feeling "disturbed" =/= content extreme as a "fact".

It's not disturbing to everyone either.

Another example: Titanic is something I loved, probably because it wasn't JUST a love story. It had action, major events, etc. and the emotional part was more fair. Though, I was only disgusted by kissing.

The Titanic was actually a real event. So you are saying you did not like the love story, but you loved the actual sinking of the ship, which was a recreation of real events? 

Okay, when watching a fictional disaster movie like The Day After Tomorrow or San Andrea's, it is entirely natural to want to see everyone slaughtered.
But when watching a movie based on a disaster that actually happened, and enjoying seeing everyone die? Yeah, that could really be considered "iffy".

 Titanic was, but not the love story.
I am saying some of the 'love' story was good, because the way they did it (Figure out how, saving people, and losing somebody) was actually good. It wasn't boring most of the time.
I wouldn't want the ship to sink in RL though.

Well the movie it's self was not showing real videos (except for the hunting treasure part specials).
I would not enjoy seeing a real video of people dying.
 Plus, I didn't enjoy the movie just because of sinking. It was because of how it was mainly used as an action film, figuring out how to escape, etc.
 And also was a sad film.

I admit, the animation isn't as good as the first movie, but some of those sequels still offer some value to plenty of people. Plus, I wasn't talking about the sequels...

The sequels do not have any value to offer. The only value that came from the franchise was from the first movie, and most of it came in the form of Lily.

"Other people do not count, my personal opinion only counts!" <Funnel
Again, you are treating your personal opinion as the "only" thing that matters in value terms.
This is one of the reason why you are a rabid hater.
Oh and it's 'Lilly', not 'Lily'.

You should realize that it was valuable to other people, and Humphrey was far more valuable than Lilly to me. And you have to realize that my feedback of value counts.
Don't treat your personal opinion as "fact".

Actually it's not. If it was, the characters wouldn't be wolves, the love story would of been 100% the same (But it's not because no one dies, some ways go different, etc.). It's like you are calling it that JUST because of 'forbidden love'.. If so, then everything is the same.
 Oh and certain other events (e.g. Lilly and Garth) was new.

So it is not a Romeo & Juliette story because it... has wolves? It is still the same story type.

It's not even the same story type.
Yet, what if someone was inspired directly from R&J and directly wanted to experience it as a wolf movie? If that's the purpose, then it's not a flaw for what it is.

Same with Sonic then.
But in all seriousness, they look great and I will say that. It's unique, etc. And you making an immature 'emo' joke that isn't even matching doesn't change that.
*New design* You: "No, I don't like new creative 'change'! They look different!"

Yes I argued a lot because I think it's fair to say this in a critique or at least showing valuable parts.

I do not think I said it as a joke

Well that's.. I don't even know what to say.
But they are not emo. If you are serious, then you are really sad.

Maybe your OC is Emo..

No. It's the fact that you argued that it 'sucks' then say your stuff didn't.. I don't like Sonic, if you get to argue your personal opinion as an argument, then I may do so back.

Well Sonic is not always good. There is crap like Sonic 3D blast, Sonic 06, and Sonic Boom. 

I don't know what Sonic 3D blast is much, but again, you are still treating your personal opinion as "fact".
In a fair argument though, Sonic 06 was buggy and glitchy. And that's a fair argument because the purpose didn't look so great as it is.

So you admit it. And no, but you made up an arguable claim that I didn't ask for. You just forced your hatred as a "fact" over someone who likes it, and yet, your stuff was arguable.
So thanks for admitting you lied.

How did I admit I "lied?"

Here is your older comment:

"I just said I thought the picture was creepy."

Soooo next.

You can find it creepy personality, but you really didn't need to say that in a place that wasn't asking you.
It's like if someone went to your Sonic art and just said "Your sonic OC is creepy to me!"

What? You think I would treat people like shit for liking it? All I said is that it is creepy to me. 

The problem is that you said that out of no where, similar to my sonic example.
 You can find it creepy again in a personal sense, but you should only say that if someone was asking you or in other possible appropriate places.

I think I remember thinking I was right because I felt so sure, but alas, I was wrong in the end.
It's still assumption and could lead to slander if you keep assuming.

What? Slander for assuming? What are you talking about.

If you say "Area does this!" without you knowing, and that you could be wrong, then it could be slander.

Again, you are bringing up something that happened in the past disconnected between me and you on a topic that has nothing to do with it.
And me saying I hate sonic does not connect to that still. That's like saying every fight connects because it's on DA. <Because old fights happened on it too.

Well it is what this all started over.

No it wasn't. That 'otherkin' journal you made, was the start. It was directly on that topic, and I didn't even remember thinking about that Sonic thing. It was just a separate thing, and you clearly started it on that.
Even if I did think about it, it's still a new fight you started within the timeline of me and you.

Stuff like "Be yourself", "Not all otherkins hurt people", "Keep drama out of forums", "Equality for all", etc.
Stop defending your stereotyping.

Have you ever seen Tumblr?
Tumblr takes those things to such extremes that it mangles them into something unrecognizable! 

Then stop saying I belong their, and stop acting like all of Tumblr is the same.

Bullshit. Perhaps you are misunderstanding people, or you idiotically for example think people attack others for disliking something when all they did was disagree about some claims.

Have you ever experienced an SJW? 
If you defend SJWs, that means you either are one or have never seen one in your life.

No I didn't. But I heard a lot of them are in that place, (But also exist in other places too) but that doesn't mean all of Tumblr is like that.

Plus, I heard the term 'SJW' was abused.

 Not it's not. Or maybe a lot of people you think is "bad" there isn't really bad people.
Plus, DA has a lot of cool people too, and you saying I don't belong here is a bunch of shit.
Maybe you belong to Tumblr, and maybe even 4chan.

4Chan seems rather nice.

A place that's just as bad as SJWs; who bully furries, make up bullshit rumors that aren't true, plan on attacking people, etc.. Yeah you really do belong their.

And also on here, I bet you want many activists, and many other people who believe change for more freedom to go there. How rude of you.

The only 'freedom' the people I am talking about believe in is an excuse to get away with their horrible behavior.

The only horrible behavior is violating another freedom of another person.
If you decide that people's freedom is "horrible" because of either some sexual identity (e.g. Vore), some furry in public, freedom of speech to disagree, an activist, a spiritual open theorist, and many other non-interfering freedom stuff, then you are biased, and bigoted.

No you shouldn't. Because if they want to believe he's reason in connection to a bunch of theories, then they have the right to. If the multiverse theory is true, then yes he's real. If the spiritual world exist, then yes he does. What I mean is that people ARE allowed to create these possibilities such as the spiritual world, and that's a legit thing under the theory. You just can't respect that and you seem to think you know everything about the spiritual world, but you DON'T.
All you are doing is calling people out for believing in something that may be possible. You call them out because they hold a more open opinion than yours and you act like you know everything, but you don't. <FOLKS, MINE

Now, Funnel's:

Sonic. Isn't. Real!

You know, I love Star Wars. I love Star Wars many times more than Sonic. And it would be cool if Star Wars was real, but guess what? It isn't! As cool as it would be if Star Wars existed, it doesn't, and I must accept reality.

"Because I said so!" <You
Folks, Funnel admit that he cannot accept the real reality, with open theories, etc.
He seems to think he knows everything about the multiverse, the spiritual world, etc. but doesn't.
This is one of the main problems with Funnel. Much bigotry, and stupidity.

Sorry Funnel, but whenever you claim "NOT REALZ", you are admitting you know everything, you censor open curiosity, open theories, etc. and that's not healthy.
It's just as bad when a certain person claims that the Earth is flat and not round.

That Christian attacks others, maybe that's different? But I would call people like you out considering you are no different than that type of Christian.
Well believing in Sonic doesn't infringe upon a real man. But your stuff does exactly what that example Christian does.

Well the guy who thinks Sonic is real is damaging himself.

Sorry, but no he's not.
And plus, it's his body, not yours. Morality comes in whenever another person's freedom is being violated by another.

However, you are damaging yourself for pretending you know everything when you don't.
And I already explained this.

When did I say that? I mean, our bodies are slowly made by our own genes, if that's what you mean. And I believe in the after life, you can, and I was mainly talking about the astral plane, or spiritual world (Same thing?)
I don't want to turn into one, but for someone who does, yes it's possible.
"I think that's bad because I somehow know everything about the spiritual world and afterlife!" <Funnel

You said you can turn into a cat because "thoughts create reality"
Yes, the astral plane is a spiritual realm. But you can not transform into your Sonic FC on it.

Well if someone was on a certain level of consciousness, then in a way that can be very true faster.
Currently we have limited beliefs, etc. right now.
Actually, you can.
You can't decide that people can't turn into certain things just because your overly emotional mind said so.

How bigoted can you get with your own selfish ego head that seems to think it owns everyone else going there?
You don't know the spiritual world and you acting like that shows how much bigotry you can get.

Yes according to the things you refuse to even fucking get.
How do you know he's 'not' real? What about the afterlife you don't know, what about all the universe you don't know, what about anything else you don't know.
The way you 'bring them out' as "bad" shows that you act like you do know, but you don't. So that's why you are clearly a bigot and a egoist moron.

Because, once again. SONIC. IS. NOT. REEEEAAAAAALLLL!

Actually, if Sonic is real then so is the universe-jumping duo of Willy Wonka and Emperor Palpatine coming here to this universe to kill you! And don't forget they are riding an ostrich too. 

"Because I SAAAAAAIIIIDD SOOOOOO!!!!!!!" <Funnel

We live in the universe possibility that it's not happening.
Remember, the multiverse contains anything a simple thought contains.

 Not true. Adults swear when they are in stress sometimes, and other annoying situations. This is natural.

You've never ever had to listen to a squeaker, have you? Once you hear them, you dread them for life.

What?

If you do that, that's bullying. Critiquing is about improving something for what it is.
Your so-called "critique" is NOT a critique.

And helping a person improve themselves?

Improving is about improving what's there. Not changing it to something it's not.
So if you bring out a main intention, then you are destroying it rather than improving.

Also, a 'fetish' is part of their identity. If they express it in a way common people do, that's not obsessed.

Well a lot of them clearly are obsessed. 

No they are not.
If so, then expressing kissing is obsessed then.

Again, censorship.
When someone argues you, it may have a lot of text. Deal with that.
If someone wants to see other comments, they still can.
And it wasn't 'irrelevant'.

All I did was maturely disagreed and explained why, then you censored me.

You did not even care about Sonic.exe or even knew what it was. You were just bitching about the fact that I made the stamp, and nothing else. 

I played it before I commented it.
No I didn't.. In fact, unhide the comment and let me see.

Then what IS your job?

I am NOT telling. Because of shitty people like you, stalking me a lot, I don't want my personal activity known online.

If you just tell people what your job is then maybe you would be more credible! And how is knowing your job title a form of stalking? Because I am sure there are a lot of others with the same job!

Because the more you refuse to let people know what your job is, then the more people will assume you do not have one.

I do not need to tell people what my job is in order to be more credible.
Because of the fact that people like you are trying to know me more so you can easily stalk me even more, etc. The problem is that if I tell, people would know more about my own identity and what I do.

And, that doesn't mean they are right.

Pressuring people to change doesn't work. You can influence someone, but not force them.

Influencing is far different than what you do.
The way you do, is force. And yet, didn't you admit that you so-called 'peer PRESSURE'?

Peer pressure is just influencing

Peer pressure has the word pressure.. The fuck man.
Also it's not. You don't influence, you just pressure people and force them to change to someone like you, and force them to believe in your unproven claims (e.g. About the higher realms)

I think I said that because of the past crap you and some other people do. And I thought your argument was connected to that at the same time.

That's a different subject. This is about under the main belief of 'other people' despite that 'everything is created by 'my/you' thoughts.

Also, that means I created all the war, you guys, and etc.

So you are not even gonna argue it

I should be asking you the same thing with many stuff you do.
Especially your bigotry closed minded "IT'S NOT REALZ BECAUSZE I SAIDZ SO, YOU CAN GET EVERYTHINZ IN THE REALMZ EXCEPT WHAT I BELIZEVE IS STUPZIX!" crap.

And I did argue it.

Assumption is often based off some 'sort of' evidence' thing. It's just assumption. And again, not real concrete meaning you shouldn't act like you 100% know.

You can probably (depends) say "I assume he.." and that would be more accurate.

It would still be the same thing

No it's not.
"I assume he..." =/= "He does this."

Actually from discovering many things, that's not true.
Not just violating freedom, and disrespecting others for being themselves, but society in general is very hypocritical.

Discovering what?

Many things about our own society being very shitty than we thought.

Anyway, a pedo may violate a human right (Child) but if their is a pedo who would only control his stuff and only go to the fiction realm and nothing more, then as a responsible person with the understanding of Freedom, yes.
Also note: A pedophilia can exist without violating the law. Just saying.

But he should not have child porn, or else his sexual desires could grow into something ugly.

 Fear is not an answer. I also at least once heard an argument that having fictional CP would prevent them from doing the real thing.

If it has an agenda then it is usually biased or skewed.

Not really. A lot of agendas I've seen is the opposite.
You are just calling them biases because you can't stand the criticism.
Seeing you deny so much open information about Copyright, and other things by depending on where, and who is a big example of biases.

More proof why humans are getting more dumb:
thetruthwins.com/archives/scie…

www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05…

www.livescience.com/37095-huma…

The first one may be 'one of those' sites you think of, but that doesn't automatically mean they are wrong.

The first one has the word "truth" in it's title.

The second one is an opinion blog.

And the third one draws from sources like FOX News and MSNBC

Also, one of the things you learn in college psychology is that humans are getting smarter.

And this is why you are biased yourself Funnel.

An opinion with good evidence.

Again, you are one hell of an idiot.

This is why you can't take actual criticism.
And that you depend on random blind teaching you were taught from in public schools.
They could be wrong, these links I've sent actually is good at debunking that.

And didn't you just say that "Science means concrete?" You seem to be admitting it is not entirely concrete.

A theory made up by scientific stuff it's self isn't science. But the stuff that people connect to the theory might be concrete/science.

That's part of science.
If someone shows the past, that's also an observation.
And observation is a big part of science.

They are not part of science themselves.

Observation is a HUGE part of science. Without it, we wouldn't be in this age.

Umm no it doesn't. Making a unproven claim because you said so is not science.
 We don't need people like you to ruin science.

Dude, this is what your "Law of Attraction" guys do...

Actually, science can be used to support it. It's supported by open evidence, etc.
You on the other hand just say things without allowing anything to challenge you. Closed Minded Funnel.

The problem is that spreading those ideas are hard, people can be bullied for spreading the ideas, etc.
Some websites even forbid open talk about some subjects because those 'some subjects' are taboo.
 And of course, some overly emotional people made some consenting freedom illegal.

Nothing is stopping scientists from sharing among their peers and eventually getting it into a textbook. There is NO censorship going on. I think censorship of that is actually illegal.

Not true.
Censorship is often everywhere, and I don't mean Copyright only, but a lot of people attack others for opening it, and you just admitted Furaffinity (Well it's a claim only) BANS/CENSORED open information about another taboo.
Trust me, from what I experience and wonder, it's real.

Science can NOT answer everything. Science does a good job on explaining how the physical world works, but it can not answer political, religious, or philosophical issues. 

 Yes it can be actually. If someone claims "This is fake" And science shows and discovered that this was indeed Photoshopped, then yes it's fake.
Oh and by the way, "Science" doesn't fully know how our physical world works due to the fact that it's been proven that we still don't fully know matter, etc.

Science can NOT answer all issues. Science is NOT the ultimate authority. Science can describe, but it does not call the shots.

Science does not know everything, nor will it ever will. But it has proved that matter does indeed exist, that the Earth is round, and that evolution is true.

However, science will never answer philosophical or spiritual issues. EVER!

Actually it might be an 'ultimate' source.. Maybe you just don't know what science is.

Actually someday, science may be able to prove ghosts, realms, etc.
No it wasn't. The real fact is that every time we zoom in on an atom, we see a missing space, and the more we zoom in, we see more empty spaces. You are talking about something that was already debunked by quantum theories, including the recent atom experiment, and another thing.

"Because I said so!" <Funnel
You do not know that. Plus philosophical is more science actually.
Some day science can prove that it's real, and explain that it's real, etc.

-----------

Part 2

ARTICLE NOT FINISHED. Funnel did not finish all parts.
It will be published so far. -Master