This thread is permanently archived
Fuck you! normal burg g/u/rl
| This is call for a war
| I vice ceo of angry b/u/rg will no longer tolerate the existence normal b/u/rg and their idiotic normalization of the one and only b/u/rg we know in love. Here and now i order commence on all of the angery force to banish the normal b/u/rg out of our textboard!
| angry burg UNITE
| stfu
| burg is the one and only, the mere fact that you have to call it "normal burg" to differentiate it from the pathetic joke you call "angry burg" is proof enough that burg will always triumph angry burg, for burg is the only true burg and only burg will rule the burgdom with a burg crown and a throne of burg.
| >>645126
However, "angry" is a negative concept, so it would be below zero, thus adding it to our beloved burg would only serve to diminish the total result, however great burg may be... which finally brings us to the absolute truth that burg can not be under angry burg.
Your membership to the burg order will be revoked, shall you further classify burgs by degree of angryness, which is blasphemy btw.
All burgs are born equal.
Respecc teh burgs.
| >>645378 >>645384
how can anger be the lack of something? it's an emotion, not the lack of one. until you can point out to me what the opposite of anger is, I'm posting angry burgs.
| >>645426
it's a negative emotion, if you add it to something, it makes the result less than before
| >>645457 nonsense. if you're excited and frustrated you're feeling two things, not zero, even though they're different valences. thus angry has to add to burg.
| >>645460
you are implying we were talking about "the number of things burg is feeling"
>if you're excited and frustrated you're feeling two things, not zero
, but that's not what I was saying.
you were also mislead into thinking that something "negative" has to mean "that lacks something".
>how can anger be the lack of something?
and I never said that.
I'm also madly puzzled about your use of the word valence in this context.
| You could have used another interesting argument, which is that I was considering a measure of burg by the combined state of their emotions, each weighted by their positivity or negativity.
You could have used a sensible argument that only the magnitude of their feelings should count!
However I'd argue that burg being devoid of any bias toward positivity or negativity, I would find that a burg at peace with their emotions must be the best burg.
burg should be neutral
| Mind you, I was only pointing out a small flaw in the reasoning.
I personally find all burgs to be perfect as they are, unbounded by useless metrics.
I would also like to remind you of what I said before :
I still find that classifying burg by their level of angryness is heresy, and must be a motive for correctional action.
| all burg are perfect
but angry burg more so than others
| >>645465
1. Valence is from a theory that models emotions with 3 numbers. Positive valence means 'good' emotions like 'happy', negative the opposite. It's kinda bullshit.
2. I am considering nothing but the presence of the emotion. Burg + an emotion must be more than burg with no emotion. Thus it is obviously superior.
| >>645465
3. It is utter nonsense to deny a burg's level of anger. If it didn't matter, then why are there two types of burg? There are two radio selectors in the post form! Two burg counts on the main page of danger/u/! They are not just classified by anger level, but DESIGNED TO BE SEPARATED by it! Denying that is ignorance of the highest order.
| I think it's important to remember that we all get angry sometimes. This is what angry burg offers. A level of humanity. Angry burg has emotions, and that's not something to take lightly. This makes angry burg more real, and raw. It is by being vulnerable, and by revealing to us the parts that give it it's humanity, that really gives angry burg it's strength. Through vulnerability, and by acknowledging it's anger, angry burg reveals it's strength over burg to us.
| This is why I support angry burg. Because I'm not given some lie to blindly trust. Instead, I'm given something real, something I can relate to, and something I can confide in.
| >>645499
1. Weird model, huh ?
2. That's a wonderful system. Are you perhaps saying something along the lines of "more is better" ?
3. I simply pointed out that this may be a useless metric.
>deny a burg's level of anger
Those words you talk about, they've only ever been written by you.
Please stay on track.
There are two radio buttons, so why insist on ever picking only one, when you have the choice to live a fuller burg experience ?
This thread is permanently archived
| https://boards.dangeru.us/burg/thread/644473
I hate you