He was sleeping soundly naked, and I was eating leftover sushi. I couldn't help myself. I spread open his cheeks ever so softly, and tucked a slice of Philly roll right next to his puckered asshole. He did not wake up. When he awoke several hours later, he thought he had shit himself. I managed to video him discovering it was in his asshole, and I cannot stop watching him dig salmon, cream cheese, and rice out of his butthole. I also cannot stop laughing. I needed to tell someone.
What happened to this ad? :(
More Copypastas
Useless Spotify ad
twitchquotes:
Thanks for listening to Spotify. No, really. You could've listened to the radio. You could've spun some vinyl. You could've played a cassette tape. You could've listened to an eight track tape, if you knew what an eight track tape looked like. But you listened to Spotify. Thanks for that. And you still have hundreds of more playlists to enjoy
twitch chat
Game Theory: Who asked?
This leads to the very mysterious question: "Who asked?" Well, to understand the question, we have to understand the answer: So this very particular question is asking about who asked, the question is divided into two parts: Who & asked "Who" is what is called an "Interrogative word" which specifies the answer to make it suitable for the question, the "Who" here is specifying a person/human/homo sapiens/guy which has a brain to think about the surrounding stuff which surrounds him, which distinguishes the person/human/homo sapiens/guy from animals, plants, extraterrestrial creatures, or objects, so the answer should be as I said in the abstract: A human. Second: "asked" is a verb in the second condition of the forms of the verb, which are divided into three types: Regular, Past, or Past participle. and the verb "asked" is in the "Past" condition, which talks about the time that is gone and no longer exists. The original form of this particular verb is "ask", which is to say something in order to obtain an answer or some information. So, to summon what the answer wants from the previous two points, it's that: The answer wants to understand and know about the person/human/homo sapiens/guy who wanted to say something in order to obtain an answer or some information. So, in order to answer this question, we will have to identify two points: First: What was the question that the subject of the answer to the question "Who asked?" asked? Well, to understand this question, we will NOT have to understand what is the answer. We will just have to understand the definition of "Question" The "Question" is A sentence worded or expressed so as to elicit information. Questions could be identified using the "Interrogative Words", which we talked about earlier. these "Interrogative Words" are nine, which are: Who, What, Where, Why, Which, When, Whose, Whom, and How. We are going to explain each individually: As we said earlier: "Who" is specifying a person/human/homo sapiens/guy who has a brain to think about the surrounding stuff which surrounds him, which distinguishes the person/human/homo sapiens/guy from animals, plants, extraterrestrial creatures, or objects, so the answer should be as I said in the abstract: A human. "What" is specifying a non-person/non-human/non-homo sapiens/non-guy who either does not have a brain that he can understand and think properly with, like plants, or objects, or they have a brain, either that their brains cannot understand and think properly, like animals, or their brain can understand and think properly, but their species/type is rather different from the society, like extraterrestrial creatures, so the answer should be as I said in the abstract: A(n) animal, plant, extraterrestrial creature, or object. "Where" is specifying a place, city, country, continent, etc. where something happens, or some(one/person/human/homo sapiens/guy), plant, animal, extraterrestrial creature or object which exists in a place, city, country, continent, etc. "Why" is specifying a reason for doing something. "Which" is specifying a choice of either two or more choices that the receiver of the question usually chooses. "When" is specifying a time in which either something already happened, or something will happen in either near, or far future, for example: "When will anyone save me as I was captured by MatPat for trying to comment a joke about his video?" "Whose" is specifying a person/human/homo sapiens/guy who has a brain to think about the surrounding stuff which surrounds him, which distinguishes the person/human/homo sapiens/guy from animals, plants, extraterrestrial creatures, or objects, and that person/human/homo sapiens/guy owns something, or someone ( if he is a human trafficker ), and the sender of the question is trying to find who owns that something, or someone. "Whom" is an old-fashioned term, not often used today. Many native English speakers are less than clear about its accurate use. In fact, the word serves the same purpose as "Who" questions, which as we said: specifies a person/human/homo sapiens/guy who has a brain to think about the surrounding stuff which surrounds him, which distinguishes the person/human/homo sapiens/guy from animals, plants, extraterrestrial creatures, or objects, so the answer should be as I said in the abstract: A human, but tends to be used when it is the object of the verb. With modern English, there is no real need to use the term. "How" could be referring to the way something is done or refers to the status of the receiver of the question. Now, let's get back to where we were talking: Questions can be different, and many, and the possibility of guessing the question could be high or low according to the frequency of using it, but guessing a question which was asked for the first time is very difficult, so, it is not specific what was the question that the subject of the answer to the question "Who asked?" asked. Second: What is the purpose of the question "Who asked?"? Well, it could be referring to roasting someone as the humor of "No one asked.", and it could be referring to actually asking a question about who asked the question. So, here's the answer to the question "Who asked?": It could be anyone who made something unlikely for the others or someone who asked a question which could be a hint to treasure, or a last "sentence" from somebody, or something else. (s)He could be you. (s)He could be me. (s)He could be Elon Musk. (s)He could be even your mom. as long as they have made something unlikely for the others or they have asked a question which could be a hint to treasure, or a last "sentence" from somebody, or something else.
Who Asked?
Lenny face brick wall
I strongly support Nintendo in their potential legal action against the developers of Palworld
As a huge fan of Pokemon and someone who has played my fair share of video games, I strongly support Nintendo in their potential legal action against the developers of Palworld.
In my opinion, what the developers have done is nothing short of blatant plagiarism. It is one thing to take inspiration from another artist's work and add one's own unique twist on it, but what Palworld has done goes far beyond that. The game's designs, including the creatures and their abilities, are almost identical to those of Pokemon. The overall feel and atmosphere of the game are also remarkably similar to Pokemon. It is as if the developers have taken the Pokemon world and simply given it a new name and coat of paint.
It is important to note that this sort of plagiarism not only harms the gaming industry, but it also hurts the people who are genuinely creative and innovate within the industry. By allowing blatant copying of others' work to go unpunished, we send a message that original thought and creation are not valued. This, in turn, disincentivizes creativity and innovation in favor of simply taking ideas from others.
Additionally, using a well-known brand and franchise like Pokemon without permission is a clear violation of intellectual property rights. By doing so, the developers of Palworld are profiting off of intellectual property that they do not own. This is a serious offense that can lead to negative legal consequences if Nintendo were to take legal action against them.
In conclusion, I strongly support Nintendo in their potential legal actionagainst the developers of Palworld. Plagiarism has no place in the gaming industry, and allowing it to go unpunished sets a dangerous precedent that disincentivizes creativity and innovation. It is crucial that we protect intellectual property rights and reward those who are genuinely creative and innovative within the industry.
Palworld
This is an absolutely worthless comment
This is an absolutely worthless comment, and yet it has been upvoted. You have contributed absolutely nothing to any semblance of discussion, and your one word comment at the top has taken away from the others who have commented real things below you. I would kindly suggest that you delete your comment and let the others shine