Things that you're SICK of people SAYING.

[---nikoli]

One of my idiot boss's favorites: "You don't know your limits until you push yourself past them".

 

Although after seeing this image I'm thinking of making a huge poster out of it and supergluing it to their office wall. 

[Wandering_Mania]

On 6/14/2026 at 1:00 AM, ---nikoli said:

Although after seeing this image I'm thinking of making a huge poster out of it and supergluing it to their office wall. 

Let me know how that goes. If you don't get arrested for 'Sexual Harassment'.

 

On 6/7/2026 at 8:00 PM, Omnishade said:

When people take things out of context and claim you mean something you didn't, or don't ever bother trying to understand what you actually said.

Yeah, I despise that.

I mean, just the other day; I had some moron on the 'Capt.of Industry' Steam HUB define a road, and in the same sentence say that it wasn't a road, saying:

"Those aren't roads. They are just surfaces, painted to look like roads, that the trucks can drive on."

 

I called him a moron for that statement, and I got hit with a ban for 2 weeks. It's like, really? That dude was making a fool of himself, and I get banned for speaking the truth?

[Omnishade]

On 6/18/2026 at 3:16 PM, Wandering_Mania said:

Let me know how that goes. If you don't get arrested for 'Sexual Harassment'.

 

Yeah, I despise that.

I mean, just the other day; I had some moron on the 'Capt.of Industry' Steam HUB define a road, and in the same sentence say that it wasn't a road, saying:

"Those aren't roads. They are just surfaces, painted to look like roads, that the trucks can drive on."

 

I called him a moron for that statement, and I got hit with a ban for 2 weeks. It's like, really? That dude was making a fool of himself, and I get banned for speaking the truth?

 

Well, forums got to have rules to protect their members from abuse. Even if he deserved it, you could have argued your point in a less denigrating way.

[Wandering_Mania]

3 hours ago, Omnishade said:

Well, forums got to have rules to protect their members from abuse. Even if he deserved it, you could have argued your point in a less denigrating way.

Well, if people gonna say moronic things in public, I'm gonna call 'em out on it.

 

It's the rewarding of the 'unintelligent', that has gotten us to the point of where we are. You can't reward idiots, they will only get worse.

Evil begets evil. Idiocy begets idiocy.

 

Not to mention that, in the hobby of gaming; One is expected to withstand a little 'shit talk'; And simply calling someone a 'moron' is about as 'little' as it can get. But it's in no way worthy of a two week ban, and being completely silenced, with all your posts removed.

 

Remember the XB360 CoD lobbies!

[Unflavored Sardines]

"This is the game that will resurrected RTS!"  or any other similar sentence.

Acting as if there were nothing after Starcraft II. Like all the other new RTS game, where they say the identical same thing. And then forget about them!

[Wandering_Mania]

Oh and another thing I'm sick of hearing:

"Just scan this QR code for..."

Not everyone has, or wants a phone that can do that. And not everyone wants to have 6 million trackers watching every every move they make.

[Speed Metal]

36 minutes ago, Wandering_Mania said:

"Just scan this QR code for..."

"And now, a word from today's sponsor."

[Aouregan]

"We are all a little bit autistic/ADHD"

Make this statement go away, please.
It serves no purpose other than licking your own balls.

 

Edited June 23 by Aouregan

[Aouregan]

7 hours ago, Wandering_Mania said:

Oh and another thing I'm sick of hearing:

"Just scan this QR code for..."

Not everyone has, or wants a phone that can do that. And not everyone wants to have 6 million trackers watching every every move they make.

 

I am using burner flip phones wherever I go since my time in Ukraine.
The one thing you cannot track me by is my phone. It doesn't even have a sim in it. It is connected at home to my wi-fi. That's it. Once I leave my house... your guess is as good as mine where I will end up. If I don't want you to be able to track my movements at all, I leave it at home. Which is 90% of the time, since it is useless outside of home.

Edited June 23 by Aouregan

[SirDuke]

going back to basics:
I work in retail.
Some item that can't be scanned by the bar-code.
EVERY CUSTOMER: "oh, that means it must be free"
I promise, one day, I'll snap and extract some persons front teeth right after.


 

[Aouregan]

35 minutes ago, SirDuke said:

going back to basics:
I work in retail.
Some item that can't be scanned by the bar-code.
EVERY CUSTOMER: "oh, that means it must be free"
I promise, one day, I'll snap and extract some persons front teeth right after.


 

 

I worked in CD and vinyl retail at a store called World of Music in Germany. I feel your pain XD
We couldn't possibly cover re-labeling each item as fast as customers came by each day when the new prices from central came along in the morning.
And they would insist on the old price still labelled on the copy they grabbed. No, my man. That is not how it works.

Edited June 23 by Aouregan

[Wandering_Mania]

1 hour ago, Aouregan said:

I am using burner flip phones wherever I go since my time in Ukraine.
The one thing you cannot track me by is my phone. It doesn't even have a sim in it. It is connected at home to my wi-fi. That's it. Once I leave my house... your guess is as good as mine where I will end up. If I don't want you to be able to track my movements at all, I leave it at home. Which is 90% of the time, since it is useless outside of home.

I have a KaiOs flip phone that I never even allow, let alone has the capability to access the net. It's no 'burner'. But it sure as hell ain't tracking me, as I never even take it out of my home when I leave. It stays in one place all the time. So no tracking by 'cell-tower transfers'. And because it never access the net, there's no tracking from that either.

 

I use it for phone calls, and yes, texts; But only because a few people I know insist on using that format (and I still despise it). Still, all this 'Big Brother' crap needs to go, ASAP.

[RedHeadAngel]

Something else I'm tired of hearing is people say is "preheat." I get why people say it, but grammatically, it doesn't make sense. You're going to heat up your oven before you heat it up? Just say you're going to heat up the oven.

 

This next one isn't something people say, but I think it still counts. It's when people type a message, but it looks like they typed it by smashing their keyboard into their face. For example, some idiot on YouTube replied to a comment I posted with whatever the fuck this is.

 

Quote

The fk u men titanic wan't a bad boat the thing sink on it 1st trip the peple who made it shold be in jail forevr rip tho who died

I had to read this slowly three times just to understand what the fuck they were trying to say. Also, Titanic was a ship, not a boat. If you don't know what the difference is, here's a little maritime wisdom. A ship can carry a boat, but a boat cannot carry a ship.

[Wandering_Mania]

2 hours ago, RedHeadAngel said:

Quote

The fk u men titanic wan't a bad boat the thing sink on it 1st trip the peple who made it shold be in jail forevr rip tho who died

I had to read this slowly three times just to understand what the fuck they were trying to say. Also, Titanic was a ship, not a boat. If you don't know what the difference is, here's a little maritime wisdom. A ship can carry a boat, but a boat cannot carry a ship.

Shows what that dude knows. The people who built, designed, and owned that ship are all long dead. Even the company is long dead. As it merged, then dual named, then got swallowed up:

Quote

White Star merged in 1934 with its chief rival, the Cunard Line, operating as Cunard-White Star Line until Cunard purchased White Star's share in the joint company in 1950. Cunard then operated as a single company until 2005 and is now part of Carnival Corporation. As a lasting reminder of the White Star Line, modern Cunard ships use the term White Star Service to describe the level of customer service expected of the company.

 

[RedHeadAngel]

55 minutes ago, Wandering_Mania said:

Shows what that dude knows. The people who built, designed, and owned that ship are all long dead. Even the company is long dead. As it merged, then dual named, then got swallowed up:

Exactly. Also, the fact that Titanic wasn't a poorly built ship for the time. By today's standards, yes. There are design choices that wouldn't pass, and the materials used to build the ship would be considered substandard. However, by 1912 standards, Titanic was among the best ships in the world. The ship just so happened to be thrown into the exact situation she wasn't built to survive. That's what I told that idiot, which led to the comment I quoted.

 

There is one detail about that quote that isn't entirely correct, though. The British government actually forced the merger between WSL and Cunard, due to the Great Depression. This was because they wanted to complete Cunard's latest ship at that time, the R.M.S. Queen Mary.

[shrtjsrtj]

4 hours ago, RedHeadAngel said:

Also, Titanic was a ship, not a boat. If you don't know what the difference is, here's a little maritime wisdom. A ship can carry a boat, but a boat cannot carry a ship.

This has always been a frustrating distinction to me, the BOKA Vanguard could probably fit something the size of the Titanic on it but we still call boats of that size ships. In my mind if that's the definition then it should be if it fits on that thing then it's a boat, it's the biggest boat carrier I know of so making it the benchmark of what is a boat vs what is a ship makes sense.

 

But that's not how it works in the real world, heck in the wiki article for that thing they say it can carry ships...

 

I guess it's just one of those things that are so over simplified that it's wrong in some cases, like defining ultra processed food as food you can't make at home when there are people out there who absolutely can use those same industrial processes and weird chemicals at home.

[RedHeadAngel]

6 minutes ago, shrtjsrtj said:

This has always been a frustrating distinction to me, the BOKA Vanguard could probably fit something the size of the Titanic on it but we still call boats of that size ships. In my mind if that's the definition then it should be if it fits on that thing then it's a boat, it's the biggest boat carrier I know of so making it the benchmark of what is a boat vs what is a ship makes sense.

 

But that's not how it works in the real world, heck in the wiki article for that thing they say it can carry ships...

 

I guess it's just one of those things that are so over simplified that it's wrong in some cases, like defining ultra processed food as food you can't make at home when there are people out there who absolutely can use those same industrial processes and weird chemicals at home.

To be fair, it's a really old saying. 😄

[Wandering_Mania]

1 hour ago, RedHeadAngel said:

There is one detail about that quote that isn't entirely correct, though. The British government actually forced the merger between WSL and Cunard, due to the Great Depression. This was because they wanted to complete Cunard's latest ship at that time, the R.M.S. Queen Mary.

Well, you'll have to talk to wikapedia about that. As that is where I pulled it from.

 

34 minutes ago, shrtjsrtj said:

This has always been a frustrating distinction to me, the BOKA Vanguard could probably fit something the size of the Titanic on it but we still call boats of that size ships

The Exon Valdez could also probably carry the titanic... Oh wait it sank as well.

Still, over time construction projects have grown in size. WWII aircraft carriers are dwarfed by today's carriers. And tomorrow (figuratively speaking), aircraft carriers today, may be dwarfed by 'spacecraft carriers'. It is the evolution of engineering.

[RedHeadAngel]

2 hours ago, Wandering_Mania said:

Well, you'll have to talk to wikapedia about that. As that is where I pulled it from.

Yeah, that’s why I don’t trust Wikipedia. It can be useful, but it’s also a gamble when it comes to researching topics.

[Aouregan]

2 hours ago, RedHeadAngel said:

Yeah, that’s why I don’t trust Wikipedia. It can be useful, but it’s also a gamble when it comes to researching topics.

 

Wikipedia is net 2.0, meaning it is made by people for people. Anyone can make edits to it, if subject matter experts agree to the change. It is a good method in theory,

I can make a wiki site about you before morning dawns.

Edited June 24 by Aouregan