From: scott@athena.mit.edu (Scott D Bradburn)
Subject: Re: Chun Li's a hot babe!
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 12:21:48 GMT

In article <dAj+AP#@engin.umich.edu>, tonychen@engin.umich.edu (Antony Chen) writes:

|> Oh, oh, yeah, Chun Li!  Oh, oh, harder, faster, she's sooo good!  If this is
|> what you are thinking in your mind, GET A FUCKING LIFE!  Keep your private
|> sexual fantasies out of UseNet.  Just in case you're wondering, if you are
|> having sexual fantasies with Chun Li, I recommend a therapist.  It is true
|> that at some times in people's lives, they get desperate, but thinking that
|> a video game arcade character is hot is not only perverted, but it almost
|> extends into bestiality.  Fucking a live cow is fuckin' disgusting, but if
|> you wanna stick your dick into the coin slot over at your local arcade so
|> you can fuck Chun Li, then my advice to you is use a condom, one with
|> electrostatic guard, but I think those kind are only available through
|> Capcom.   *laughing hard enough to cry*...geez, buy yourself some porno mags
|> and jerk yourself off, but don't go posting your desires on UseNet,
|> especially when you're not fantasizing about REAL women.  (I'd tell you to go
|> out and get a girlfriend, but I don't think this is possible for you unless
|> you start going out with one of those fugly shits that play SF2.)

Ah, I see... you advocate jerking off to pictures in magazines, but
not electronic pictures, that's *FAR* too disgusting for you.

On a further note, this is one of those great threads that should not be
flamed.  Why's that, you ask?

Well, lets analyze the affects of the flame.
A)  You flame someone who was joking, and they post a followup that makes
you look like an annoying flamer, and damn fool, with no sense of humor.

B)  You flame someone who was joking, and they're man enough not to post
that followup.  Everyone reads the article thinks you're an annoying flamer,
and thinks you're a damn fool, with no sense of humor.

C)  You flame someone who wasn't joking, and they post a followup that
says they were joking and.... (see A above)

D)  You flame someone who wasn't joking, and they don't want to respond
so...  (see B above)

E)  You flame someone who wasn't joking, and they read it and say, "Hey!  What
an insightful genious!  I hadn't realized to this point that I had no life!
I should thank this person very generously for making me realize what a loser
I have been.  I'm going right now to seek therapy for my problem.

Anyone wanna place bets that E will never happen?  Any reformed losers out
there wanna take this space to thank some flaming asshole for reforming you?

Hmm... no response, I guess not.

I will point out that in cases like Sheng Long posters, especially those that
cite the EGM article as evidence, might just fall into the E category, but I
find it's far more satisfying to just point out (with no flame) that they are
one more naive soul who fell for EGM's April Fools joke.

The problem with flames is that it puts people in defensive mode where they'd
be willing to argue that the earth is flat, the sky is green, and Sheng Long
is the last character on SF2, but you can only get there by having Chun Li
kill Bison by throwing her bracelets.


				Scott