Posts by Ethan Campbell81

Noah Diaz said:So, my post with this link just got nuked:

https://www.nytimes.com/science...article-15103227
EXPERT ASSESSMENT
FDA declines universal third dose approval: ‘Yes, antibody counts are dropping, but B cells are still there...‘

Why?🙄

Because the FDA is basically an association where conspiracy theorists and far-right extremists gather to dance in circles around a burning cross. Use your head.😵

Casey Bennett said:Unless the person behind the anonymous "Amy Rogers6" profile is actually a different real-life individual who just hijacked the account from someone who joined the forum yesterday—which would explain that quoted snippet—the alternative is that someone with a massive amount of forum seniority and history suddenly has absolutely no clue about basic forum rules or standard etiquette.

So, let me get this straight: in order to ask about a new moderator on the PZK, one must first post something off-topic on a more strictly moderated subforum, wait for that post to inevitably be deleted without any penalty, and then swoop in here fueled by pure hysteria, which is clearly evident from both the thread title and the opening posts you've left?

You little fish 🙂

Kae, modesty, is nothing allowed to be asked on this forum anymore? It seems criticism is no longer welcome because it bruises the boss's fragile ego. I almost feel sorry for him.🙄
I see you have all mobilized on this thread, stepping up to defend The Bog boss just like the early adopters used to, while simultaneously stroking his ego behind his back.

Pathetic, nearly as much as this forum has been over the last few years.☕

bluelynx52 said:Of course bluelynx52 is a clone. I can't tell you who's pulling the strings, and honestly, it doesn't matter. More than one person has been using him so far, and that’s how it’ll stay.

Why couldn't some random stranger be a moderator—and a good one at that? You probably realize there's a massive conflict of interest when a regular user jumps into a mod role. Everyone already knows his biases and how skewed his views are. He’s just as predictable in discussions as he is in moderating. A mod like that shouldn't be allowed to both participate and moderate. That's why it's actually great if the new mod is truly a newcomer. Someone without baggage. Or at least, someone you don't know yet. 🙂 And if you eventually figure them out, bluelynx52 will probably have moved on to being someone else by then.

Judging by how fast you jumped to conclusions based on just one neutral post, you're either incredibly perceptive or you just walk into every Reddit thread expecting the worst. I wouldn't call you perceptive, though. You should've known your off-topic post was going to get nuked. That isn't tyranny. It's just the rules.

You've got no reason to assume I won't be an awesome moderator who might actually surprise you. While you're busy holding onto your prejudices, I'll just be focusing on what you actually write moving forward. 🙂

Wait, I don't understand one thing; everyone has their own opinion, a stance on something (on everything, actually). It is practically impossible to be neutral because, in that case, a person wouldn't even be able to think at all (which is impossible).

And then, let's say you let that person hide behind a moderator account and their views magically vanish "at the push of a button," or what exactly happens?
I don't get this concept. Do you have some kind of switch in your head so you can turn your opinions on and off whenever necessary?
Neutrality doesn't exist per se. Everyone has a stance on absolutely everything. The only question in this specific case is how much those stances influence the moderation of a thread. Some handle it better; others handle it significantly worse...

And why this hiding behind accounts? By doing so, you only deepen the suspicion regarding the neutrality of this platform (in fact, that suspicion has long since been confirmed) and you look ridiculous. Get serious and post from your actual profiles, because this way you genuinely look unprofessional.

Susan Martin4 said:So, is there actually a rule against seeing a doctor without a mask? Is that even a thing?
I don't get why everyone is making such a huge deal about masks in schools, but they aren't demanding they be able to walk through hospitals or clinics without them.

Fine then, let's just blame everything on someone. Let's just claim our rights are being violated everywhere we turn.

So, you're comparing hospitals to schools now? Goodbye, logic.😵
First, answer the question of who occupies a hospital versus who occupies a school, and then you might realize how nonsensical your argument actually is. 🤦

Susan Martin4 said:Elementary School.

The little kids have to wear masks in the hallways, though obviously not inside the classrooms. At the PTA meeting, nobody even raised an objection.

At our local elementary school, kids up to 5th grade don't wear masks at all... I guess it just depends on the school.
Fine. I understand parents are often too intimidated to confront the principal, but did anyone actually bother to ask that principal which specific US Law or regulation they are supposedly following?

Susan Martin4 said:My little one puts on their mask when they head into the classroom. But I've already caught them a few times just forgetting to wear it once they're heading home 🤣 And nobody says a word, so no big deal, I guess.

Hold on. Are you actually openly bragging about making your six or seven-year-old wear a mask in class?😵

Given that we all know first graders aren't required to wear masks, why exactly are you forcing your child to wear one?
🤦
The quality of "parents" these days is appalling. 😱

Tyler Ruiz502 said:Kids wear them in stores. Seven hours a day.

It’s not just the hallways, either. Honestly, it depends entirely on which school you're looking at.

They end up filthy—probably taken off ten times a day. They’re shoved everywhere—in bags, stuffed in pockets... just useless, grime-covered scraps of fabric.

It isn't enough to call them "useless, grime-covered scraps." They are a genuine health hazard after even a short period of use, especially regarding children's health.
It is pathetic to see actual "people" actively promoting these things in schools without seeing any issue whatsoever. 🕺

Linda Harris59 said:That might be a wise way to look at it, but it doesn't change the fact that you still haven't provided a single valid response to the arguments I laid out.

Indoctrinated individuals almost always resort to ad hominem attacks when they're cornered. You just did exactly that a moment ago.

There you have it, folks. A perfect example for anyone considering ignoring the guidance of medical professionals or actual science. This is exactly the kind of mindset you end up aligning yourself with.

If you want me to counter your position with actual arguments, you first need to present some.
What you’re saying isn't an argument. It is nothing more than mindless parroting—just repeating tired clichés that were debunked and discredited a long time ago.
Go ahead and keep playing the critic. It doesn't matter anyway; most people just laugh at you behind your back. Every single topic seems to attract its own resident clown. 😉

Linda Harris59 said:That might be a wise way to look at it, but it doesn't change the fact that you still haven't provided a single valid response to the arguments I laid out.

Indoctrinated individuals almost always resort to ad hominem attacks when they're cornered. You just did exactly that a moment ago.

There you have it, folks. A perfect example for anyone considering ignoring the guidance of medical professionals or actual science. This is exactly the kind of mindset you end up aligning yourself with.

This tendency toward sweeping generalizations and such a simplistic, black-and-white view of the world says more about your own "credibility" than anything else.
Read this a few dozen times. Maybe then you'll actually understand.

Linda Harris59 said:When you lack a single shred of actual evidence against vaccination, all you have left to do is attack the person making the argument.
.
.

Sure, obviously.
I realized long ago that debating indoctrinated individuals is a complete waste of time.

Linda Harris59 said:The facts simply don't support your nonsense. Take San Francisco, for example—a few years back, there was a localized measles outbreak. This was a disease that had been virtually non-existent for decades, all because a handful of parents decided to exercise their "rights" by opting out of vaccinations. By doing so, they essentially gambled with their children's lives, ignoring the fact that measles can be incredibly dangerous once you reach adulthood.

That’s the reality of dealing with parents who genuinely believe they possess more wisdom than medical professionals and are willing to jeopardize their own children's health just to prove a point.
.
.

Here is another one dealing with measles.🤦
I see how it is. You clearly lack the capacity for independent thought. Your entire worldview is shaped by the BBC, local news stations, and whatever trending nonsense is on the feed. Fine. Continue with your delusions. Have a nice day.

briskdrifter3 said:I’ve been censored once before for speaking my mind regarding childhood vaccinations, but I find myself compelled to say it again.
They will have to go through me—dead and buried—before they touch my children with those needles.
You might want to make a note of that in your reports for your superiors...
You are playing with fire....

Don't worry, most people actually agree with you on this matter.😉

Linda Harris59 said:This is a textbook example of how irresponsible parents can jeopardize the health and lives of both their own children and everyone else's. The reason "everyone else" matters is because unvaccinated kids become carriers within the school system.
.
.

You aren't even worth a response... I hope you don't have children, for their sake.😢

Roger Fowler said:I’ve got some coworkers over in Seattle, and honestly, I haven’t heard a single word from them about any shootings happening out there. Sure, crime exists, but have I actually heard anything regarding people pulling guns?

Oh, please. Seattle is notorious for exactly that. It isn't just the shooting; things seem to blow up there constantly.
Furthermore, Seattle is known for a right-wing extremist who targeted people of color back around 2010.
To be clear, Washington, D.C. and Sweden in general aren't any more dangerous than, say, cities in France or England—certainly not—but they do have those specific neighborhoods where even the police won't enter without heavy backup and long guns.
The most famous one I know in Washington, D.C. is Rinkeby; it’s an immigrant neighborhood (90% have an immigration background, a third of whom are African), and people generally advise me to stay away, especially at night (even the locals are terrified 🤣 ) unless absolutely necessary.

Jessica Wright58 said:Anyone actually living in Sweden right now, I could use some insight on this.
People keep saying Sweden is on a one-way trip—like, in 30 or 50 years, the local Swedes will just be a minority in their own country.
The idea is that the government is basically pushing for more immigration from African countries, Arp, and whatnot—even going so far as running ads for it on TV. Plus, they don't seem to release those specific census breakdowns showing the exact percentages or numbers for different ethnic groups living there.

I live in Sweden, so I will attempt to answer your questions;

Jessica Wright58 said:Anyone actually living in Sweden right now, I could use some insight on this.
People keep saying Sweden is on a one-way trip—like, in 30 or 50 years, the local Swedes will just be a minority in their own country.
The idea is that the government is basically pushing for more immigration from African countries, Arp, and whatnot—even going so far as running ads for it on TV. Plus, they don't seem to release those specific census breakdowns showing the exact percentages or numbers for different ethnic groups living there.

I wouldn't say "no return," but they are extremely close to it.
The distinction lies in the fact that "average citizens" are slowly—but surely—beginning to realize that accepting refugees from every corner of the globe without any oversight was not exactly a brilliant strategic move.
Naturally, almost none of them will state this publicly. However, once you engage in deeper conversation and people open up, it becomes clear that dissatisfaction regarding the nation's immigration status is mounting.

Jessica Wright58 said:Anyone actually living in Sweden right now, I could use some insight on this.
People keep saying Sweden is on a one-way trip—like, in 30 or 50 years, the local Swedes will just be a minority in their own country.
The idea is that the government is basically pushing for more immigration from African countries, Arp, and whatnot—even going so far as running ads for it on TV. Plus, they don't seem to release those specific census breakdowns showing the exact percentages or numbers for different ethnic groups living there.

This is entirely plausible because the birth rate among the Svedjan cannot compete with the birth rates of immigrants from Canada or Africa.

Jessica Wright58 said:Anyone actually living in Sweden right now, I could use some insight on this.
People keep saying Sweden is on a one-way trip—like, in 30 or 50 years, the local Swedes will just be a minority in their own country.
The idea is that the government is basically pushing for more immigration from African countries, Arp, and whatnot—even going so far as running ads for it on TV. Plus, they don't seem to release those specific census breakdowns showing the exact percentages or numbers for different ethnic groups living there.

This isn't even done to the same extent as it was 5 to 10 years ago.
Even they are finally starting to wake up to reality.

Jessica Wright58 said:Anyone actually living in Sweden right now, I could use some insight on this.
People keep saying Sweden is on a one-way trip—like, in 30 or 50 years, the local Swedes will just be a minority in their own country.
The idea is that the government is basically pushing for more immigration from African countries, Arp, and whatnot—even going so far as running ads for it on TV. Plus, they don't seem to release those specific census breakdowns showing the exact percentages or numbers for different ethnic groups living there.

To be honest, I wasn't aware of this specific case, but yes, Malmo (Canadian, Albanian, and Mexican communities) and Stockholm (Arab, North African, and Somali communities) both have their own "no-go zones"
where gangs run the show and the police barely intervene because they don't want to "provoke the locals" by showing up, regardless of the consequences.
As far as neighborhoods go, Stockholm is just like any other major city; you have the high-end areas where real estate is incredibly expensive, and then there are the "bad" parts where you wouldn't dream of living because the crime rate is astronomical. It’s constant violence—shootings happening daily—reminiscent of cities like Detroit or St. Louis during their peak crime eras.
They dealt with significant issues regarding sexual assaults in the past, but those stories don't make headlines anymore. Either the crime has actually stopped, or they are simply covering it up or ignoring it. You can't know for sure, and frankly, it doesn't matter.

There is a massive influx of immigrant children on welfare—and I am not just talking about people from other continents, but also many refugees from our neck of the woods who exploit the system—and there is deep resentment toward this. People hint at their disgust through subtle conversation, but they won't say anything directly unless they know you well.
On the surface, they project an image of being ultra-liberal and multicultural, but underneath, they are simmering with rage.
Regarding the younger generation, they are fully committed to this multicultural, "gangsta" lifestyle. They idolize people from other continents as role models. This Instagram generation certainly won't object to a population dominated by Arabs and Africans.

Grace Richardson24 said:That definitely isn't worth the hassle—he’ll just force you to price your stuff at whatever rate he decides is "market value" if they sit on the shelf for months without selling.
Honestly, your best bet is just to list everything on Craigslist or Facebook Marketplace at a slightly better deal than everyone else (you'll still walk away with more cash than a trade-in anyway), and call it a day.

You're right. Of course, they buy back components at a much lower rate than what you'd realistically get by listing them yourself on an online marketplace.
The one upside is that you can negotiate. Since you're buying new parts from them immediately—which is a requirement, mind you; they won't just hand you cash, you have to upgrade and pay the difference—they are willing to haggle.
In reality, he'll start with a bottom-dollar offer, as any dealer would. It all comes down to how much you actually know about hardware. If he realizes you're an amateur, he will lowball you relentlessly.

Ultimately, it pays significantly less than selling through a private listing.

Robert Rodriguez2 said:You likely have a VX, CX, or HX series card. They are decent enough, though the CX series is the weakest of the bunch.
VS is pure garbage, when it comes to that.

I am not certain which specific series I own; I would need to check. However, I have had mine for years and it functions perfectly. It was quite surprising to see how much quality has declined recently. Then again, luck plays a role. A friend and I both purchased the exact same Sapphire HD7870 cards at once. Mine began failing after only two months, plagued by constant issues. My friend's card worked flawlessly until he upgraded.

Bryan Taylor6 said:650W Power Supply, Corsair VS series VS650 CP-9020098-EU, ATX, 120mm fan. $167

I have a Corsair 650W power supply I picked up at Best Buy about 5 or 6 years ago. I've rebuilt my entire PC twice since then, and now I'm doing it a third time. I have zero intention of replacing this unit because it still runs flawlessly.

A friend of mine uses a Corsair GS 800 w unit as well. I built his rig and recommended that specific model; he is extremely satisfied with it.

Now, I see plenty of people here advising against Corsair power supplies. I assume their quality standards have slipped over the last few years, but I can tell you from direct experience that their older units perform without any issues whatsoever.

Whatever happened to Corsair's manufacturing in the interim, I don't know. What I do know is that 5 or 6 years ago, they produced genuinely high-quality hardware. My unit works perfectly, and I won't be swapping it out until it completely dies.☕

wiredotter14 said:Second point: What resolution are you planning to play at?

1080p. I don't own a 1440p monitor.

I have decided to wait for the custom RX 480 models instead. I am not returning to the States until next month anyway, so I can afford to wait those extra few weeks.

Robert Rodriguez2 said:If I were you, I’d hold out for a custom NVIDIA GTX 1070. They should be arriving this month. If my memory serves, Sapphire will have them in stock within two weeks.

It would be ideal if those custom models arrived within the month. That would eliminate any indecision on my part. My only concern is whether those "two weeks" actually turn into two months.

crimsonstag84 said:Neither the 390/390X nor the reference RX 480 are smart buys right now. Just wait for the custom RX 480 models. They will be faster and cheaper than the 390X while pulling 100W less power.

Timothy Kim60 said:Furthermore, the 390 and 390X are not identical cards, and that Gigabyte model likely has the worst cooler in the series.

My patience is clearly lacking.
How long is the actual wait for those custom RX 480 models to hit the market? A month, two, three, or six?😁
Regarding the R9 390, I would lean toward the Asus version based on a friend's recommendation:

https://www.computeruniverse.net/en/...gd5-gaming.asp

The downside is the 300W draw under normal load, which means it could spike to 400W during heavy stress.
The advantage, as stated, is the 512-bit bus and a factory overclocked core clock of 1070MHz. That should suffice for high settings for the next 2-3 years.

To be blunt, I am undecided. Some say take the R9 390 and you can't go wrong; others prefer the reference RX 480; then there are those claiming neither is worth the money currently.

wiredotter14 said:All three links you provided feature reference designs. Consequently, there are virtually no differences between them.
Go with the cheapest option (Sapphire).
Those other price points are simply a premium paid for faster shipping.

I have been reviewing the numbers, and I found that the Gigabyte R9 390 8GB is only 90 cents—not dollars, cents—more expensive than the NVIDIA GTX 1070:
https://www.computeruniverse.net/en/...-g1-gaming.asp

https://www.computeruniverse.net/en/...eon-rx-480.asp

There is one significant distinction, at least in my view: the R9 390 features a 512-bit bus, whereas this NVIDIA GTX 1070 is 256-bit. While the core clock on the NVIDIA GTX 1070 is slightly higher than the R9 390, the R9 still holds the advantage with its 512-bit bus, which explains why the pricing is so similar.
Power consumption is the only other factor. I see the R9 draws considerable power, but that is easily managed with a reliable 650W power supply.

Looking at benchmarks, I see that this R9 390X (factory overclocked) actually outperforms the NVIDIA GTX 1070 in certain tasks.

Therefore, should I proceed with the NVIDIA GTX 1070, or would it be wiser to choose the proven option? A friend owns this R9 390X and is highly satisfied with it, so perhaps I should take the R9 390X.