Has this website had more awful liberals or more awful conservatives?

[I AM MOBIUS]

Yeah, I seem to remember coining 'Drinksnacks' from Drixnax...

Virtually everything that's ever been wrong with the world is essentially due to conservatism. That's why as (parts of) the world becomes more liberal, it becomes more tolerant - less racist, homophobic, sexist, intolerant...

So basically, aren't all conservatives essentially awful?

Which I think is a large reason why Loin's list is already so massively skewed...

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

For the record, eyesofnight=Thorn.

Nope. Thorn is/was Evan Von Christoph.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Ecofarm's posts about living on a ten meter by ten meter plot of land were too funny to be awful.

10 feet by 10 feet. One hundred square feet.

100 square metres might actually work.

[rah]

Nope. Thorn is/was Evan Von Christoph.

I believe Evan Von Christoph was eyesofnight. Eyesofnight was his civ II MP gaming handle.

[giblets]

10 feet by 10 feet. One hundred square feet.

100 square metres might actually work.

The lowest estimate I can find is .07 hectares (700 square meters)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, I seem to remember coining 'Drinksnacks' from Drixnax...

Virtually everything that's ever been wrong with the world is essentially due to conservatism. That's why as (parts of) the world becomes more liberal, it becomes more tolerant - less racist, homophobic, sexist, intolerant...

So basically, aren't all conservatives essentially awful?

Which I think is a large reason why Loin's list is already so massively skewed...

You are just jealous you aren't on the awful liberals list and are campaigning to get on it right now, aren't you?

[I AM MOBIUS]

Well, that's my subtle approach out of the window...

[loinburger]

If anything I'd put Mobius on the awful conservatives list, since he's a sheep buggerer

[kentonio]

Yeah, I seem to remember coining 'Drinksnacks' from Drixnax...

Drixnax certainly deserves to be on there, although I suspect he's actually a sociopath rather than merely an evil conservative.

[Aeson]

The lowest estimate I can find is .07 hectares (700 square meters)

Don't confuse what we do with what we could do. Yields are actually high enough with specific crops that 100 sq feet can produce enough to subsist on. It's just absurdly inefficient to grow food that way. (One person subsisting poorly off their own labor, when the same amount of skill/labor could feed hundreds or thousands. We have plenty of footprint to spare.)

[loinburger]

Pol Pot's agrarian paradise wasn't big on efficiency either

[giblets]

Hitler was big on efficiency, therefore efficiency is immoral.

[Aeson]

Hitler was a man.[/feminist]

[I AM MOBIUS]

****ing feminists trying to take Hitler's achievements away from him because he was a man! [/kid]

[Elok]

Hitler was big on efficiency, therefore efficiency is immoral.

From what I've read, he really wasn't. Totalitarian states are inherently inefficient, because they prioritize the pursuit of ideological goals above even the most important practical considerations. Aside from the well-known example where he kept the stupid camps running even as he was getting invaded from both fronts, his government was a tangled rat's nest of overlapping organizations with duplicate functions.

Also, police state is -2 to efficiency, except for Yang, the most innately despotic character. Lal, who can't have police state, is -1 efficiency anyway, despite his innate fondness for democracy which is +2 efficiency. So, uh, I guess I'm not sure where I'm going with that. Don't be a pirate or a communist, and do recycle stuff? And democracy is cool too, as long as you're not Indian.