Arizona tries to close FST.

[mjmacky]

You're trying to get away with it. The rule only states that porn covers existing subject, but there is no exclusive requirement in said rule. That being, that you can have porn for things that don't exist. I'll submit an example.

P.S. It was taking too long to find a decent porno (older mythologies just seemed too accessible), and I didn't want to do the Silverman thing, so I just made my own. How can this porno exist by your assumption?

Attachment 106579

Your point detracts from your stance

The rule I posted is the real and actual rule. The one you alluded to is the shorthand version for people who are hard of reading and/or thinking.

I'm beginning to doubt that you know what my stance is. Also, the original rule was even shorter than the one I used. There's probably a rule about that.

[manker]

It is easy to lose track but I'm fairly confident that your stance is that you wish you were from Arkansas and that your sister was narcoleptic.

[mjmacky]

The original stance was, "find me redneck anime".

[manker]

Which I did

[mjmacky]

Which I did

You most certainly did not.

[manker]

Always the contrary, Mary.
The problem is that you think in straight lines. I'm pretty sure that your favourite source of anime output wouldn't deign to stop drawing schoolgirls with cawks long enough to meet your precise requirements. You need, therefore, to consider that sexual-related material does, indeed, pre-exist for any conceivable subject and work backwards from that.

Once this small mental ellipse is complete, you can return to your comfort zone of linearity and methodically cross-hatch the internets.

[mjmacky]

Always the contrary, Mary.
The problem is that you think in straight lines. I'm pretty sure that your favourite source of anime output wouldn't deign to stop drawing schoolgirls with cawks long enough to meet your precise requirements. You need, therefore, to consider that sexual-related material does, indeed, pre-exist for any conceivable subject and work backwards from that.

Once this small mental ellipse is complete, you can return to your comfort zone of linearity and methodically cross-hatch the internets.

If I were to analyze it, I don't see much of a theme of linear thinking, rather the first thing I'm picking up on is reverse engineering. The problem here lays with qualifications. The first qualification being what makes an anime. There's the issue of style & origin in addition to it being animated (video vs. image). The second qualification being that rule 34 doesn't determine if something actually exists or is tangible, it is a distinct convention that porn can exist, and porn only; therefore it is not a qualifier for anything outside of porn.

Set aside the err in your handling of the second qualifier, the rule 34 scenario, and let's hypothesize and presume to accept that you're interpretation both makes sense and is justifiable. You would have been attempting to present evidence that some redneck cartoon(s) exist. In that case, since there are many redneck cartoons, one would only need to submit the titles of a well-known redneck cartoon, e.g. King of the Hill, Squidbillies, or Bugs Bunny (a la Elmer Fudd).

Most interesting that you press on though. It's been a fairly extended amount of time since such a deliberately inane topic of debate that inherited an air of serious discourse has entertained me through my willing participation. To ally myself with the opposing platform through expressing an idea, I would have taken a different approach than you. I would have tackled the "redneck" factor directly. By that I mean the Japanese have their own version of a "redneck", therefore you could established a cultural equivalency and worked from there.

Have I gotten carried away yet?

[manker]

Always the contrary, Mary.
The problem is that you think in straight lines. I'm pretty sure that your favourite source of anime output wouldn't deign to stop drawing schoolgirls with cawks long enough to meet your precise requirements. You need, therefore, to consider that sexual-related material does, indeed, pre-exist for any conceivable subject and work backwards from that.

Once this small mental ellipse is complete, you can return to your comfort zone of linearity and methodically cross-hatch the internets.

If I were to analyze it, I don't see much of a theme of linear thinking, rather the first thing I'm picking up on is reverse engineering. The problem here lays with qualifications. The first qualification being what makes an anime. There's the issue of style & origin in addition to it being animated (video vs. image). The second qualification being that rule 34 doesn't determine if something actually exists or is tangible, it is a distinct convention that porn can exist, and porn only; therefore it is not a qualifier for anything outside of porn.

Set aside the err in your handling of the second qualifier, the rule 34 scenario, and let's hypothesize and presume to accept that you're interpretation both makes sense and is justifiable. You would have been attempting to present evidence that some redneck cartoon(s) exist. In that case, since there are many redneck cartoons, one would only need to submit the titles of a well-known redneck cartoon, e.g. King of the Hill, Squidbillies, or Bugs Bunny (a la Elmer Fudd).

Most interesting that you press on though. It's been a fairly extended amount of time since such a deliberately inane topic of debate that inherited an air of serious discourse has entertained me through my willing participation. To ally myself with the opposing platform through expressing an idea, I would have taken a different approach than you. I would have tackled the "redneck" factor directly. By that I mean the Japanese have their own version of a "redneck", therefore you could established a cultural equivalency and worked from there.

Have I gotten carried away yet?

That's a great post. Possibly the greatest ever on this particular subject.

You've got rule34 all wrong, but that isn't your fault as it's presented wrongly on the internets more often than it's expressed correctly - and who is to say what the correct rule is. I'm surely no authority.

I hadn't considered the other, quite obviously, redneck animations, to be honest. I was thinking too narrowly in that respect, too. Now you've brought it up, though, it appears that I was even more correct than I first thought. Which is astounding, because I'd already taken a stance which was pretty gosh darn correct.

However, your last paragraph particularly threw me, which is why I said about your post being great. I didn't think that Japanese culture would have their own rednecks. But why not? I bet they're represented somewhere in anime too, given the propensity of the Japanese to output an extraordinary level of anime on subjects both within and without of its borders. Since you mention that too, it brings into focus the utter justification of my first comment whereupon I called you a pneub for assuming its non-existence.

All I can say is thank you for framing my argument in a much more cohesive way than I did.

[mjmacky]

You've got rule34 all wrong, but that isn't your fault as it's presented wrongly on the internets more often than it's expressed correctly - and who is to say what the correct rule is. I'm surely no authority.

I hadn't considered the other, quite obviously, redneck animations, to be honest. I was thinking too narrowly in that respect, too. Now you've brought it up, though, it appears that I was even more correct than I first thought. Which is astounding, because I'd already taken a stance which was pretty gosh darn correct.

However, your last paragraph particularly threw me, which is why I said about your post being great. I didn't think that Japanese culture would have their own rednecks. But why not? I bet they're represented somewhere in anime too, given the propensity of the Japanese to output an extraordinary level of anime on subjects both within and without of its borders. Since you mention that too, it brings into focus the utter justification of my first comment whereupon I called you a pneub for assuming its non-existence.

All I can say is thank you for framing my argument in a much more cohesive way than I did.

Are you insisting this image is not the accurate origin, even without authority?

Spoiler: Show

630px-Rule_34_original.jpg

Or that it can claim origin from this list of rules?

Spoiler: Show

rules_of_the_internet_v2.gif

To be correct about your original stance, you would either need to submit some porn of redneck anime, or a sample of redneck anime. Even with my assistance you went back to square one. I feel like I'm not being thoroughly appreciated
Am I supposed to find it myself now?

[manker]

I am indeed insisting that and, ffs, that list of rules denotes /b/ as /B/.


I posted some porn of redneck anime, or at least the front cover of a comic I definitely don't have saved on my HD.
Lastly, what part of me suggesting that you methodically cross-hatch the internets inferred anything other than you finding it yourself.

I'm busy with busy things and overlord jobs.