Question for those that have analytical smarts real good (that means you Plunkey)

[PICK3]

When I was in college a few millenniums ago ... a PhD Ivy League Math teacher told me something I've never forgotten.

He said, "A trained philosopher can out think a trained mathematician with the left hemisphere of his brain tied behind is back".

Does a post doctoral level trained person with a concentration in the Philosophy of Logic have superior analytical skills to a similarly trained mathematician?

 

[stilleto]

From philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend:

"The withdrawal of philosophy into a “professional” shell of its own has had disastrous consequences. The younger generation of physicists, the Feynmans, the Schwingers, etc., may be very bright; they may be more intelligent than their predecessors, than Bohr, Einstein, Schrodinger, Boltzmann, Mach and so on. But they are uncivilized savages, they lack in philosophical depth — and this is the fault of the very same idea of professionalism which you are now defending."

 

[mrplunkey]

When I was in college a few millenniums ago ... a PhD Ivy League Math teacher told me something I've never forgotten.

He said, "A trained philosopher can out think a trained mathematician with the left hemisphere of his brain tied behind is back".

Does a post doctoral level trained person with a concentration in the Philosophy of Logic have superior analytical skills to a similarly trained mathematician?

I'd guess the top 1% of either discipline is equally talented. But on average, I personally would go with the mathematician. But if given the choice of a mathematician versus an equally-trained engineer, I'd go with the engineer.

Philosophy has a little too much naval contemplation for my taste.

 

[PICK3]

I'd guess the top 1% of either discipline is equally talented. But on average, I personally would go with the mathematician. But if given the choice of a mathematician versus an equally-trained engineer, I'd go with the engineer.

Philosophy has a little too much naval contemplation for my taste.

What I'm asking pertains to those experts in the discipline of logic and reason. Not the Existentialism yo-yos.

 

[mrplunkey]

What I'm asking pertains to those experts in the discipline of logic amd reason. Not the Existentialism yo-yos.

Then I don't know.

Most of my math is number-crunching (i.e. parameter estimation). I leave all the fluffy stuff to people who don't want to make things.

 

[PICK3]

Then I don't know.

Most of my math is number-crunching (i.e. parameter estimation). I leave all the fluffy stuff to people who don't want to make things.

I'm guessing "logic experts" assist A.I. developers and other programming applications.

 

[mrplunkey]

I'm guessing "logic experts" assist A.I. developers and other programming applications.

Not sure about that one...

Developers can have great logic skills.

Digital EE's (bit bashers) can have great logic skills as well.

I'd think that for a given application (i.e. writing a device driver for hardware), a specialist would be a vastly better choice.

 

[binö]

it must be asked:
if a vibram squat takes place and no one is there to witness it,
did it really occur?
discuss

 

[PICK3]

Not sure about that one...

Developers can have great logic skills.

Digital EE's (bit bashers) can have great logic skills as well.

I'd think that for a given application (i.e. writing a device driver for hardware), a specialist would be a vastly better choice.

you've been of little help

go get a Ph.D in Logic from a Ivy League school and report back to me.

Where's samoth when I need him?

 

[PICK3]

it must be asked:
if a vibram squat takes place and no one is there to witness it,
did it really occur?
discuss

only if claim of said squat was posted on the interweb

 

[mrplunkey]

you've been of little help

go get a Ph.D in Logic from a Ivy League school and report back to me.

Where's samoth when I need him?

Samoth is a physics nerd. That means he's about 50% useful. He'd probably be able to give you perspective from both sides.

 

[mrplunkey]

it must be asked:
if a vibram squat takes place and no one is there to witness it,
did it really occur?
discuss

Damn! More temptation.

But see? This thread contains the kinder, gentler plunkster.

 

[PICK3]

Damn! More temptation.

But see? This thread contains the kinder, gentler plunkster.

Do it! Do it! Do it!

 

[samoth]

I'm guessing "logic experts" assist A.I. developers and other programming applications.

So your comparing the workings of a NAND gate with tensor analysis on the tangent bundle of an n-dimensional manifold?

Logic as a [sub]field can be very complex; e.g. propositional calculus-based modal logic, deontic or temporal logic (see John Halleck's Logic System Interrelationships).

Philosophy in the classical sense hit a ceiling a long time ago, and now revolves around technology and singularities and other questionable topics. Human knowledge, science and exploration have brought many of the philosophical inquiries beyond normal thinking (What is mass? How does the higgs field interact? What is spin? What is a group? How do tachyons function in a universe with 3 time dimensions and 1 space dimension?) that normal people don't even understand the basic premises. I don't think philosophy really exists outside of its existential form any more.

But to answer your OP, it all depends on how you define "think" in that statement. There exists no dispositive answer or credited response to such a statement.

 

[samoth]

He'd probably be able to give you perspective from both sides.

I am familiar with computer logic and mathematical logic. Logic as a pure academic field, however, I am clueless about. I think it's just an extention of mathy prop logic, but I don't understand the bases of different logical systems outside of basic temporal (before/after) and propositional (if/then). Maybe they just make things up, like different algebraic rings or something.

 

[-SD-]

Damn! More temptation.

But see? This thread contains the kinder, gentler plunkster.

If an argument between proper education and all natural pot smoke occurs on EF, but no one else is logged on, did it really happen?

 

[PICK3]

So your comparing the workings of a NAND gate with tensor analysis on the tangent bundle of an n-dimensional manifold?

No, I believe a NAND gate and other digital mechanisms were developed by engineers/mathematicians to emulate mechanical switches in a micro electronic world.

I think what my professor proposed to me was the superiority of rationalization from a expert in logic and reasoning in a theoretical sense vs. other applied scientist.

But, I don't pretend to have any conceptualization of any of these processes.

Hence, the original question.

 

[PICK3]

Unfortunately, I don't have smarts real good

and I wasn't blessed with particularly good looks




fml!

 

[samoth]

No, I believe a NAND gate and other digital mechanisms were developed by engineers/mathematicians to emulate mechanical switches in a micro electronic world.

I thought it was the other way around. All these gates are worked out using math logic.

I think what my professor proposed to me was the superiority of rationalization from a expert in logic and reasoning in a theoretical sense vs. other applied scientist.

Applied? No arguement. But most upper-level math and physics is pure theory.

What does it mean to rationalize? Sans existentialism, is the hypo directed at someone solving a mystery, or visualizing half-integer quantum spin in n dimensions at v>c? Can an unknown be solved via reason, and is anything possible to be belived an image of truth? But if truth can never be told so as to be understood, and not be believed...

... perhaps we haven't come as far in the past 250 years as we like to think.

 

[PICK3]

If an argument between proper education and all natural pot smoke occurs on EF, but no one else is logged on, did it really happen?

If everyone on EF post that PICK3 is a Mo, does that really make him a lover of the cawk?

 

[mrplunkey]

I am familiar with computer logic and mathematical logic. Logic as a pure academic field, however, I am clueless about. I think it's just an extention of mathy prop logic, but I don't understand the bases of different logical systems outside of basic temporal (before/after) and propositional (if/then). Maybe they just make things up, like different algebraic rings or something.

^^^ Same boat

 

[PICK3]

I thought it was the other way around. All these gates are worked out using math logic.

I think mechanical switches were developed before programmable logic, but I digress.

btw, the chicken came before the egg

 

[mrplunkey]

I thought it was the other way around. All these gates are worked out using math logic.

Yup. The transistor is the switch. Then the transistors are arranged in order to produce the logic effect.

Here's your basic NAND gate:

 

[needtogetarmy]

When I was in college a few millenniums ago ... a PhD Ivy League Math teacher told me something I've never forgotten.

He said, "A trained philosopher can out think a trained mathematician with the left hemisphere of his brain tied behind is back".

Does a post doctoral level trained person with a concentration in the Philosophy of Logic have superior analytical skills to a similarly trained mathematician?

No. Who has won more Nobel prizes? Philosophers or mathematicians?

 

[mrplunkey]

If an argument between proper education and all natural pot smoke occurs on EF, but no one else is logged on, did it really happen?

Evil!

Don't tempt me. I'm trying to be good.

Irregardless of massive inflation under Reagan.

Awwww shit. Got me again!

 

[mrplunkey]

No. Who has won more Nobel prizes? Philosophers or mathematicians?

That would have worked on me until they handed 'em out to Wooden Al and Barry.

I expect next year's Nobel for chemistry to go to the guy who discovered the pop rocks / diet coke exploding mouth trick.

 

[PICK3]

No. Who has won more Nobel prizes? Philosophers or mathematicians?

Ummmmh ... the discipline that had more peeps in the nominating/awarding process in the same discipline?

 

[miplank]

I'd guess the top 1% of either discipline is equally talented. But on average, I personally would go with the mathematician. But if given the choice of a mathematician versus an equally-trained engineer, I'd go with the engineer.

Philosophy has a little too much naval contemplation for my taste.

I can't wait until redsam pops in here to tell you how you're wrong.

 

[PICK3]

That would have worked on me until they handed 'em out to Wooden Al and Barry.

I expect next year's Nobel for chemistry to go to the guy who discovered the pop rocks / diet coke exploding mouth trick.

am I going to hell for feeding the neighbor's dog pop rocks when I was a kid

 

[PICK3]

I can't wait until redsam pops in here to tell you how you're wrong.

RS has an unfair advantage of grasping obtuse concepts since he's participated in teh killer internship.

just sayin'

 

[mrplunkey]

I can't wait until redsam pops in here to tell you how you're wrong.

As long as he doesn't begin discussing semen textures and types again, I'll be fine with it.

 

[PICK3]

fuck! my head hurts from just formulating the question

time for me to go get my xannie swerve on and catch some The Simpsons reruns

 

[mrplunkey]

RS has an unfair advantage of grasping obtuse concepts since he's participated in teh killer internship.

just sayin'

One cannot help but wonder if he wore teh vibrams while bailing hay.

Oh dear god. You guys got me started again!

 

[PICK3]

One cannot help but wonder if he wore teh vibrams while bailing hay.

Oh dear god. You guys got me started again!

ololololol2

 

[nangiggles]

I guess Im a little too slow because I cant even see a pont of comparisson

Mathematician = cold hard numbers, proof, tangible, equations
Philosopher = abstract, questions, deep pondering, few actual facts

 

[miplank]

ololololol2

lolololooloololo

 

[PICK3]

lolololooloololo

ololoImnotsmartorattractivegoodthingIhaveareallybigcawkololol2

 

[miplank]

ololoImnotsmartorattractivegoodthingIhaveareallylargecawkololol2

pics?

 

[layinback]

leibniz, descartes and bertrand russell were philosopher\mathematicians and they were some supra smart cats but Math is a very narrow indicator of intelligence. i don't think darwin was a math wiz and he may be the single most important figure in science.

if leibniz hadn't discovered calculus, someone else would have. if shakespeare hadn't written hamlet, no one would have.

all philosophy seems to be moving towards a cognitive end. it has certainly filled in some "blanks" and played an important role in our development of critical thinking.

in the real world, being cooperative and empathic seems to yield the best results. the ability to build and coach teams, to help people understand their strengths and weaknesses and be their best

requires a form of intelligence independent of the aforementioned varieties. creative intelligence and the ability to apply it to everyday problem solving and conflict resolution is a rare commodity

and it can't be quantified in any orthodox manner. not to say that these types can't be math geniuses but it certainly isn't a prerequisite.

obama and carter are classic examples of highly intelligent ( by academic measure ) men who are totally ineffective. reagan on the other hand had a modest intelligence and he was instrumental

in changing the world. ( in a positive way lol ) many many more examples of this.......

btw, your professor was a bit ambiguous with his "out think" statement......... define" out think."

i recently went up against a firm in philly. we were vying for a market research contract. the owners of the company are ivey league

boys and highly accomplished businessmen in the research arena. i dropped out of highschool and we've been doing market research

all of 18 months lol. i got the contract. similar situation in may where we pummeled a political polling firm in atlanta. the owner has a

doctorate in political science and a 15 year pedigree in the industry. we've been in that game for 2 years and i got the deal.

"out thinking" is a nebulous term and usually doesn't mean much without a commensurate "out performing" IMHO

 

[hurricane]

leibniz, descartes and bertrand russell were philosopher\mathematicians and they were some supra smart cats but Math is a very narrow indicator of intelligence. i don't think darwin was a math wiz and he may be the single most important figure in science.

if leibniz hadn't discovered calculus, someone else would have. if shakespeare hadn't written hamlet, no one would have.

all philosophy seems to be moving towards a cognitive end. it has certainly filled in some "blanks" and played an important role in our development of critical thinking.

in the real world, being cooperative and empathic seems to yield the best results. the ability to build and coach teams, to help people understand their strengths and weaknesses and be their best

requires a form of intelligence independent of the aforementioned varieties. creative intelligence and the ability to apply it to everyday problem solving and conflict resolution is a rare commodity

and it can't be quantified in any orthodox manner. not to say that these types can't be math geniuses but it certainly isn't a prerequisite.

obama and carter are classic examples of highly intelligent ( by academic measure ) men who are totally ineffective. reagan on the other hand had a modest intelligence and he was instrumental

in changing the world. ( in a positive way lol ) many many more examples of this.......

btw, your professor was a bit ambiguous with his "out think" statement......... define" out think."

i recently went up against a firm in philly. we were vying for a market research contract. the owners of the company are ivey league

boys and highly accomplished businessmen in the research arena. i dropped out of highschool and we've been doing market research

all of 18 months lol. i got the contract. similar situation in may where we pummeled a political polling firm in atlanta. the owner has a

doctorate in political science and a 15 year pedigree in the industry. we've been in that game for 2 years and i got the deal.

"out thinking" is a nebulous term and usually doesn't mean much without a commensurate "out performing" IMHO

comming back with a bang!

how the hell u been bor?

 

[PICK3]

leibniz, descartes and bertrand russell were philosopher\mathematicians and they were some supra smart cats but Math is a very narrow indicator of intelligence. i don't think darwin was a math wiz and he may be the single most important figure in science.

if leibniz hadn't discovered calculus, someone else would have. if shakespeare hadn't written hamlet, no one would have.

all philosophy seems to be moving towards a cognitive end. it has certainly filled in some "blanks" and played an important role in our development of critical thinking.

in the real world, being cooperative and empathic seems to yield the best results. the ability to build and coach teams, to help people understand their strengths and weaknesses and be their best

requires a form of intelligence independent of the aforementioned varieties. creative intelligence and the ability to apply it to everyday problem solving and conflict resolution is a rare commodity

and it can't be quantified in any orthodox manner. not to say that these types can't be math geniuses but it certainly isn't a prerequisite.

obama and carter are classic examples of highly intelligent ( by academic measure ) men who are totally ineffective. reagan on the other hand had a modest intelligence and he was instrumental

in changing the world. ( in a positive way lol ) many many more examples of this.......

btw, your professor was a bit ambiguous with his "out think" statement......... define" out think."

i recently went up against a firm in philly. we were vying for a market research contract. the owners of the company are ivey league

boys and highly accomplished businessmen in the research arena. i dropped out of highschool and we've been doing market research

all of 18 months lol. i got the contract. similar situation in may where we pummeled a political polling firm in atlanta. the owner has a

doctorate in political science and a 15 year pedigree in the industry. we've been in that game for 2 years and i got the deal.

"out thinking" is a nebulous term and usually doesn't mean much without a commensurate "out performing" IMHO

In my field I've run into several people that demonstrate the principle, "You can't read a book by the cover".

From their exterior appearance and "hick" accents you would automatically assume they are in need of a haircut, a 3rd grade education, and possibly a bath.

It doesn't take long to discover that they are experts in geodesy, geomatics, hydrographics & hydrology, along with applicable highly developed skills in GPS network adjustment, multibeam sonar, LIDAR, etc ...

They are also quite articulate with the requisite skills to sell their services and through computer applications, present their field data derived from several data sets and methodologies into a seamless graphically appealing final deliverable.

But, on the weekend they're back in the deep swamps of Louisiana trapping critters and listening to "Deliverance" banjo music

 

[mrplunkey]

In my field I've run into several people that demonstrate the principle, "You can't read a book by the cover".

From their exterior appearance and "hick" accents you would automatically assume they are in need of a haircut, a 3rd grade education, and possibly a bath.

It doesn't take long to discover that they are experts in geodesy, geomatics, hydrographics & hydrology, along with applicable highly developed skills in GPS network adjustment, multibeam sonar, LIDAR, etc ...

They are also quite articulate with the requisite skills to sell their services and through computer applications, present their field data derived from several data sets and methodologies into a seamless graphically appealing final deliverable.

But, on the weekend they're back in the deep swamps of Louisiana trapping critters and listening to "Deliverance" banjo music

I see that in the machinine shop all the time. I'll have some killer model in SolidWorks and every analysis will suggest it's machinable. Then some guy who would rather be fishing or drag racing will say: "If you cut on it there, it'll wad it up". He's right 100% of the time.

 

[PICK3]

I see that in the machinine shop all the time. I'll have some killer model in SolidWorks and every analysis will suggest it's machinable. Then some guy who would rather be fishing or drag racing will say: "If you cut on it there, it'll wad it up". He's right 100% of the time.

don't know much about the fleshlight design/manufacturing process

 

[Rachel...lol]

A physicist, a biologist and a mathematician are sitting in a street café watching people entering and leaving the house on the other side of the street. First they see two people entering the house. Time passes. After a while they notice three people leaving the house. The physicist says, "The measurement wasn't accurate." The biologist says, "They must have reproduced." The mathematician says, "If one more person enters the house then it will be empty."

 

[Rachel...lol]

 

[Rachel...lol]

A mathematician, an engineer and a chemist are at a conference. They are staying in adjoining rooms. One evening they are downstairs in the bar. The mathematician goes to bed first. The chemist goes next, followed a minute or two later by the engineer. The chemist notices that in the corridor outside their rooms a rubbish bin is ablaze. There is a bucket of water nearby. The chemist starts concocting a means of generating carbon dioxide in order to create a makeshift extinguisher but before he can do so the engineer arrives, dumps the water on the fire and puts it out. The next morning the chemist and engineer tell the mathematician about the fire. She admits she saw it. They ask her why she didn't put it out. She replies contemptuously "there was a fire and a bucket of water: a solution obviously existed."

 

[PICK3]

thought that was "c"

 

[Rachel...lol]

 

[binö]

A man is attempting a squat of 465 pounds and is wearing vibram footwear.
The video of said attempt is not posted onlines. What is the most logical answer?
A. The haze of natural weed smoke makes recording impossible
B. The camera man had a killer internship and didn't have time to record
C. The even never happened
discuss

 

[nangiggles]

A man is attempting a squat of 465 pounds and is wearing vibram footwear.
The video of said attempt is not posted onlines. What is the most logical answer?
A. The haze of natural weed smoke makes recording impossible
B. The camera man had a killer internship and didn't have time to record
C. The even never happened
discuss

LMAO

 

[PICK3]

A man is attempting a squat of 465 pounds and is wearing vibram footwear.
The video of said attempt is not posted onlines. What is the most logical answer?
A. The haze of natural weed smoke makes recording impossible
B. The camera man had a killer internship and didn't have time to record
C. The even never happened
discuss

D. Accidentally recorded over with geigh pr0n

 

[layinback]

In my field I've run into several people that demonstrate the principle, "You can't read a book by the cover".

From their exterior appearance and "hick" accents you would automatically assume they are in need of a haircut, a 3rd grade education, and possibly a bath.

It doesn't take long to discover that they are experts in geodesy, geomatics, hydrographics & hydrology, along with applicable highly developed skills in GPS network adjustment, multibeam sonar, LIDAR, etc ...

They are also quite articulate with the requisite skills to sell their services and through computer applications, present their field data derived from several data sets and methodologies into a seamless graphically appealing final deliverable.

But, on the weekend they're back in the deep swamps of Louisiana trapping critters and listening to "Deliverance" banjo music

"the world is full of shipping clerks who have read the harvard classics" bukowski

 

[miplank]

thought that was "c"

a^2+b^2=c^2

x=5

 

[miplank]

A man is attempting a squat of 465 pounds and is wearing vibram footwear.
The video of said attempt is not posted onlines. What is the most logical answer?
A. The haze of natural weed smoke makes recording impossible
B. The camera man had a killer internship and didn't have time to record
C. The even never happened
discuss

olololololololol

 

[PICK3]

Question for those that have analytical smarts real good (that means you Plunkey)

fixed!



wait, did I just Mo up my own thread

 

[mrplunkey]

fixed!



wait, did I just Mo up my own thread

Duh!

You could MO-up Jessica Alba trying to suck a golf ball through a garden hose.

Just sayin'

 

[PICK3]

Duh!

You could MO-up Jessica Alba trying to suck a golf ball through a garden hose.

Just sayin'

She's hawt!

But that image isn't her. Just the work of some Photoshop guru.

 

[Rachel...lol]

it's still hot as fuck

 

[javaguru]

Trigonometry...just sayin'.

 

[Rachel...lol]

Trigonometry...just sayin'.

i'm good with math - my undergrad is in finance and they make you do all the fucking math that computer does for you.

 

[PICK3]

i'm good with math - my undergrad is in finance and they make you do all the fucking math that computer does for you.

two snakes climbed up on a picnic table and made hours of mad snake love

a few days later the picnic table was crawling with baby snakes

moral of the story?

Even an adder can multiply on a log table.

 

[PICK3]

I finally got around to reading "A Farewell to Arms".....it confirmed Hemingway as a debbie downer in my book since I've only read "The Old Man and the Sea" beforehand...good book but depressing as hell.

no time to read fiction

if I want to be entertained I'll watch a movie

or monitor post on C&C

 

[javaguru]

"the world is full of shipping clerks who have read the harvard classics" bukowski

I finally got around to reading "A Farewell to Arms".....it confirmed Hemingway as a debbie downer in my book since I've only read "The Old Man and the Sea" beforehand...good book but depressing as hell.

 

[javaguru]

i'm good with math - my undergrad is in finance and they make you do all the fucking math that computer does for you.

I'm old....I actually had to show all my work and graph by hand....no puting contraptions so you had to confirm by checking your numbers by hand. Finance is all about formulas...much like statistics...anyone can plug and chug. Just sayin'.

 

[Rachel...lol]

I'm old....I actually had to show all my work and graph by hand....no puting contraptions so you had to confirm by checking your numbers by hand. Finance is all about formulas...much like statistics...anyone can plug and chug. Just sayin'.

well not anyone - but in general I agree

 

[javaguru]

well not anyone - but in general I agree

OK, you have to be able to memorize and regurgitate the proper formula for exams.

 

[javaguru]

no time to read fiction

if I want to be entertained I'll watch a movie

or monitor post on C&C

It's a short novel and you can probably read it in an afternoon. It's a good novel...just depressing as hell... Hemingway was writing about his experiences in WWI but he could have dialed it down a notch.

 

[mrplunkey]

She's hawt!

But that image isn't her. Just the work of some Photoshop guru.

Yes, you would scrutinize the photo instead of just appreciating its outstanding outstandingness.

 

[PICK3]

two snakes climbed up on a picnic table and made hours of mad snake love

a few days later the picnic table was crawling with baby snakes

moral of the story?

Even an adder can multiply on a log table.

can't believe nobody olololol2'ed at my adder joke

 

[mrplunkey]

can't believe nobody olololol2'ed at my adder joke

I find nothing funny regarding the multiplicative property of logarithms.

For those of us who miss our slide rules, this is merely salt on an open wound.

 

[UA_Iron]

I run a lot of FEA analysis on parts.

I let my computer do the math though. All that shit is too time consuming to do by hand, and I've done it by hand.

 

[Strongbow]

When I was in college a few millenniums ago ... a PhD Ivy League Math teacher told me something I've never forgotten.

He said, "A trained philosopher can out think a trained mathematician with the left hemisphere of his brain tied behind is back".

Does a post doctoral level trained person with a concentration in the Philosophy of Logic have superior analytical skills to a similarly trained mathematician?

Drop me off in the jungle with both and wait and see who comes out the other side.

 

[PICK3]

Drop me off in the jungle with both and wait and see who comes out the other side.

How bout I drop you off at STFU land?

 

[miplank]

lolololo

 

[PICK3]

lolololo

olololol2

 

[PICK3]

you've been of little help

go get a Ph.D in Logic from a Ivy League school and report back to me.

Where's samoth when I need him?

still waiting for an answer here [insert toe tapping vid]

 

[mrplunkey]

still waiting for an answer here [insert toe tapping vid]

What exactly are you looking for?

If you want lots of logic, I'll burn a FPGA and send it to you!

 

[redsamurai]

"how bout I drop you off at stfu land" is about the only post in this entire thread worth "ANYTHING". Had me rolling out.

It was an invalid question to begin with in any case. You two gaping B holes musta been bored to tears back then.

 

[redsamurai]

I cannot unresist to answering this question even though it's a completely useless and basically flawed comparison. But I cannot unresist because I am fundamentally a dithering gaping maw hole of man.

fixed

 

[mrplunkey]

U mad?

 

[redsamurai]

no I'm unresistable.

 

[SpyWizard]

if you can't do.. you can always teach..

 

[PICK3]

fixed

ololololol!