The insanely markovized flamewar thread

Post Reply New Topic

Here's how it works: Go here and paste in the response of the person above you. Keep jumbling it until it is suitably weird. Pick and choose the best snips of output. Take this new text, then respond to it with markovizations of itself. Toss in snips of one or two of your last posts on another thread (or any other interesting snippets) before markovizing, to keep adding new material to the insanity.

Here's an example of this in action.

I'll seed the terms of the debate, and then start the argument with myself. Bonus points if you can identify the source of the nonsense without Google.

****

World peace cannot be achieved by sitting around on our duffs singing hippy songs to the moon. Peace can only be achieved through excessive acts of seemingly mindless violence.

Who do bullies pick on in the playground? The giant, crazy looking guy who looks ready to snap and kill the person nearest or some harmless looking weenie who appears to do anything to avoid conflict? People pick on the weenie because people like to start fights they think they can win.

In the same way, people will continue to attack America and our interests when they get the idea that they can piss off America without us immediately eradicating them and everyone around them in the most painful way possible. Now the world will be pretty convinced that America is frick'n nuts and just looking for a fight, but we need to really ingrain it into everyone's conscious so that no one will ever even contemplate crossing us. This requires making good use of our nukes.

I know, nukes can kill millions of people, but they sure aren't doing anyone any good just sitting around. I mean, how many years has it been since we last dropped a bomb on someone? No one even thinks we'll actually use one now. Of course, using nukes shouldn't be done haphazardly; all uses have to be well planned out because the explosions are so cool looking that we'll want to give the press plenty of notice so they can get pictures of the mushroom cloud from all sorts of different angles.

But what to nuke? Well, usually the idea is populated cities, but, by the beliefs of my morally superior religion, killing is wrong. So why can't we be more creative than nuking people. My idea is to nuke the moon; just say we thought we saw moon people or something. There is no one actually there to kill (unless we time it poorly) and everyone in the world could see the results. And all the other countries would exclaim, "Holy @$#%! They are nuking the moon! America has gone insane! I better go eat at McDonald's before they think I don't like them."

Last edited by ZeroGravitas on 05 Apr 2011, 7:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

This requires making good use of our interests when they get the moon. In my opinion, peace can only piss off America without us immediately eradicating them and everyone around on our interests when they get the moon.

World peace cannot be peace. But, if people were more irrational you would have a parking lot. Assassination does something which should always be hard, but cannot be achieved by a little extreme nuclear annihilation. They will just create an Old Testament god to attack us.



It doesn't matter how many years it has been since we last dropped a bomb on someone. No one thinks that it should be done haphazardly, if all uses are not well planned out. But we'll want the cool looking explosions and the mushroom clouds; this shouldn't be done without plenty of pictures. This is where modal logic comes in to prove the possible existence of an ultimately excellent entity.

I'd claim to do this is to wonder if it is possible that they will start worshiping us and that we will look evil, though. When is it that they might be actually harming anyone?

Listen, it doesn't matter. So what if there's a country that the stupid dictator calls to concede to nuke the innocent? We'll still have nuked the moon for the cool looking explosions. Missile defense is hardly anything to keep them from having their leader of the moon.

Peace can get the choice: do anything with the people who will continue to win favor, or do our own so that America follows my morally superior religion.

I see what you mean but in my opinion, peace can be hard, but cannot be peace. But, if people were more irrational you would have a little extreme nuclear annihilation. They will just create an Old Testament god to attack us.
Of course, this requires making good use of our interests when they get to the moon but it cannot be achieved by an unaided parking lot.
Assassination does something which should always be achieved easily, and this is best done by applying a little imaginative use of a parking lot in a petri dish; one designed exclusively for use by annihilated moons
Peace can only piss off mushrooms without us immediately eradicating every petri dish - and everyone around the parking lot.

But how many years should it be done, without plenty of pictures? This is where modal logic should be applied in an attempt at proving the possible existence of an ultimately excellent petri dish.
It doesn't matter how long it takes to be done haphazardly, if all uses are not well planned out. But we'll want the possible existence of pictures of mushroom clouds; this shouldn't be done without plenty of parking lots.

I'd be happier claiming to keep them from having their leader as a stupid dictator of exploding mushrooms. I wonder if there's a country that we will continue to do this to? It is possible that America follows my morally superior religion and I'd claim to win favor, or does this keep them from having their leader of the stupid petri dish calling once again to win favor with parking lots, or indeed to do anything within the basic modality of doing anything - anything at all with the cool looking explosions.

Missile defense is hardly anything with the innocent? Hah. We'll still have nuked the moon, for the moon with the stupid dictator calling daily to concede to the wonder that there's a country in which we will start worshiping mushrooms in a parking lot, and that the moon is for the people who will continue to do anything to keep them from having their leader take cool pictures of the innocent? No, of course not. We'll still have nuked the Old Testament for the people and they will look evil, though.

Listen, it is a certainty that America follows my morally superior religion. I'd claim to do anything to win favor, or do anything to a petri dish with the moon, and for sole purpose of placing the moon in a parking lot. Peace can get the choice: do this and it doesn't matter. So what if there's a country that America follows, with my morally superior explosion? I'd still be first to claim nuking the innocent mushroom would produce some cool pictures.

I see that you would have a little extreme nuclear annihilation. But doesn't assassination do something which should always be achieved easily, and everyone around the parking lot?

Assassination does something which should always be achieved by the extreme nuclear annihilation of an unaided parking lot.



They will just create an attempt at proving the possible existence of our interests when they get to be done by an unaided parking lot. In my opinion, peace can only piss off mushrooms without us immediately eradicating every petri dish - and this requires making good use of mushroom clouds; this is where modal logic should always be achieved by annihilated moons. Peace can only piss off mushrooms without plenty of our interests when they get to the possible existence of an unaided parking lot.

The problem is that we'll want the parking lot in a little extreme nuclear annihilation.



I wonder if all uses are not well planned out.

But how many years should it be done haphazardly, if people were more irrational you would have a little extreme nuclear annihilation? They will continue to the possible existence of parking lots.

I'd be hard, but cannot be happier claiming to do anything within the moon but cannot be achieved easily, and this shouldn't be peace.

But how many years should it be done, without us immediately eradicating every petri dish; even one designed exclusively for use by annihilated moons? Of course this shouldn't be done by annihilated moons! They will just create an ultimately excellent petri dish - anything at all with the possible existence of our interests when they get to the stupid petri dish!



Well, I wonder if there's a country that America follows my morally superior explosion?

I'd claim to keep them from having their leader of our interests when they will look evil, though. Listen, it be achieved easily, and that's due to the cool looking explosions. I'd be happier claiming to attack us. We'll still have nuked the people were more irrational you mean but cannot be hard, but in which we will continue to win favor with the innocent mushroom would have nuked the parking lot, and I'd claim to win favor, or indeed to win favor with the Old Testament god to be happier claiming to be done, without plenty of parking lot.

They will start worshiping mushrooms in a petri dish! Is it possible existence of the moon in a petri dish; one designed exclusively for the innocent mushroom clouds; this keep them from having their leader take cool pictures of pictures of mushroom clouds; this keep them from having their leader of mushroom would produce some cool pictures of placing the innocent? No! Of the moon, for the choice: do anything to keep them from having their leader take cool pictures of pictures of mushroom would have nuked the possible existence of pictures? It is to be aborted!

This is a country that we will just create an attempt at proving the wonder that the innocent? Hah.

I'd claim to do anything within the moon, for the moon, by the moon, for use by an Old Testament god to be happier claiming to attack us. Assassination does something which should be peace. But, if people who will start worshiping mushrooms in a little imaginative use by an ultimately excellent petri dish - and for the innocent? No, of course not.

But doesn't assassination do something which should always be achieved by the parking lot, or is the cloud modality a necessary factor?
I see that you would have an ultimate nuclear annihilation, but cannot see how this would affect the cool picture of an unlimited and futile petri dish.

On the contrary. The problem is that we'll want the possible existence of our interests, but only when they get to be served by annihilated moon clouds. Peace can only piss off a parking lot without us immediately eradicating every explosion - and this always requires making good use of our petri dish.
Another explosion that must be considered is where should modal logic always be achieved, and how will cool pictures of clouds help with this? Should this be completed by an unaided moon, or by an exploding mushroom?

It is a distinct possibility and I wonder if only people were more irrational, would you have had a little nuclear annihilation or an extreme cloud? The outcome seems somewhat uncertain because they will just create an ultimately excellent petri dish; even one designed exclusively for use by an exploding parking lot.

Surely the moon cannot be anything but happier, in claiming the possible existence of our interests - when in fact they get to the possible existence of our cool interests, and only when they get to the stupid petri dish!
But how many years should it be peace, and how many years should it be hard? They will continue to be the petri dish, and will just create an ultimately excellent mushroom. This is clearly demonstrated by how many years should pass before claiming to be the moon and a parking lot, although it shouldn't be attempted by an irrational mushroom.

Well, I wonder if the innocent mushroom would have nuked the parking lot at all. They will look evil, though.
Listen, be happier claiming to attack us!

Assassination is not something which we will just create from an Old Testament god to keep them from having their leader of the existing parking lot; of course not.
I'd claim to attack us. Hah! We'll still have nuked the cool pictures of pictures of our interests, when they will start worshiping mushrooms in a country that America follows, and with my morally superior explosion I'd be happier claiming to be hard - but cannot be happier claiming to attack mushrooms.
This is a petri dish; one designed exclusively for the moon, for use by an Old Testament god to be aborted! It is of the moon, for the moon, and the moon will be happier claiming to win favor with the Old Testament god and a parking lot.

Do anything to keep them from having their leader take cool pictures of clouds? Of course not.
If people were more irrational, you mean? But they cannot be happier in claiming to be happier by claiming to keep them from having their leader take cool looking explosions. It makes no sense at all to follow this path!

I see that America follows my morally superior explosion? I'd be aborted!

This is of our interests - but the fact they get to the moon cannot be undone by how many years should modal logic always be achieved by an Old Testament god to the parking lot.

I'd be happier claiming to be peace, and that's due to the moon will look evil, though. Listen, be peace. But, if people who will continue to be achieved by claiming to win favor with the moon, for the cloud modality a parking lot, although it be achieved by the stupid petri dish; even one designed exclusively for the moon but cannot see that you mean?

It is of mushroom clouds; this shouldn't be done, without plenty of an unaided parking lot annihilation.

Well, I see that you have nuked the Old Testament god to be peace. But how many years should it be done by an unaided moon, for use of parking lot?



It makes no sense at proving the parking lot. Well, I see that must be completed by the moon but cannot see that America follows my opinion, peace can only people who will just create an attempt at proving the parking lot. But how many years should always be happier by an attempt at all uses are not well planned out. But they will just create an ultimately excellent mushroom. The outcome seems somewhat uncertain because they will look evil, though.

Peace can only piss off mushrooms in a parking lot.

Does America really follow your morally superior explosion? I'd be aborted by an unaided moon, for the moon cannot be peace.

This undeniably concerns mushroom clouds; it couldn't be achieved by an Old Testament god or be done by the cloud modality of a parking lot.

But how many years could modal logic always be achieved, and by how many years could it be achieved by an Old Testament god to win favor with the moon - for the sake of a stupid petri dish? Even one designed exclusively for the moon cannot see that you have nuked the moon.
People will look evil, though. Listen to clouds. Claim to be happier without plenty of parking lot - it is of our interests - but I cannot see that you mean it is of a parking lot? An Old Testament petri dish would certainly abort.


I see that must be made happier by, ultimately, an aborted mushroom - although the outcome seems somewhat uncertain because that will just create a further attempt at proving the parking lot is a cloud.
All uses are not well planned out and a petri dish will look evil, though.
Well, I can see how that must be aborted by the moon but cannot see that America follows my cloud - or how peace can only be people who will just create an ultimately excellent parking lot.

Mushrooms can only piss off peace in a petri dish.

I have been urged to master static relations and a parking lot. Mushrooms can only be people who will look evil, though. Listen, be peace. Does America really follow your morally superior explosion?

I'd be made happier without plenty of programmers aware of a point between two successive points in the conceptual gap between two successive explosions in the outcome which seems somewhat uncertain because they produce unaided parking lot.

More recently I see that reason we mean it be made happier by an unaided moon, for the syntactic ambiguity in which the desired specifications will look evil. Though, my second remark is sufficient to be happier without plenty of a process:

1. All uses are not well planned out.

2. We are in the process of petri annihilation until the syntactic ambiguity in text process turned up.

3. I cannot see that a stupid petri dish; even one designed exclusively for it be happier claiming to do (as wise programmers aware of go to the parking lot - or be happier) without plenty of our powers are not attach too much importance to satisfy the moon - it is delegated to be happier by, ultimately, an attempt at proving the machine.



My first remark is delegated to master static petri dish relations and a number of parking lot explosions to go to be achieved by an arbitrary action, what data do so?

My second remark is a "textual index." I see that in time I can characterize the correspondence between two successive in a very concrete manner: suppose that must be achieved by claiming to clouds. Claim to point between the go to visualize processes evolving in the moon cannot see that the program and I see that has been familiar with the sake of his program has been urged to make the absence of his activity, for the program (spread out and the corresponding process that in its dynamic process, to statements I see that will just create an Old Testament god to this process that you have been made, the correspondence between the very same point?)



This undeniably concerns mushroom - for the process that America really follow your morally superior explosion? I'd be happier without plenty of our intellectual powers are relatively poorly developed. For that must be peace. But, if we mean successive in time.) Let us call such a pointer to be aborted mushroom clouds. see that time succession of mushroom - but cannot see that a pointer to statement should always be achieved by an Old Testament petri dish will continue to a time are not well planned out in the moon cannot be happier without plenty of mushroom clouds; it couldn't be peace.

This is a stupid petri dish? Even one designed (in the dynamic behavior has to be done by an Old Testament god to the machine) exclusively for it is that must be achieved, and the moon will look evil, though. But how do we parse them as a parking lot.? How many years could it is (for the sake of his program) be due to satisfy the syntactic ambiguity in its dynamic behavior has to be peace?

My first remark is the moon but the sake of actions, but is also a "textual index."

Let us call such a further attempt at proving the cloud modality a number of actions, is that America follows my considerations for the purpose of our powers to accomplish the parking lot, although it be undone by how many years should it is stopped after an unaided moon, for the process that you mean? It makes no sense at proving the Old Testament petri dish for a cloud.

I see that parking lot. More recently, however, I cannot see that stupid petri annihilation until the machine resolves the syntactic ambiguity in the conceptual gap between two successive mushrooms - although my second remark is delegated to be happier without plenty of parking lots.
As wise programmers we are aware of programmers being aware of a parking lot and it is clearly inevitable that mushrooms can only be happier without a petri dish.

Claiming to satisfy the desired specifications will look evil unless:

1. Each one must be designed exclusively for it to be happier as an unaided moon.
2. All morally superior explosions must follow America. (I'd be happier without plenty of mushrooms).
3. Any attempt at proving the process of petri annihilation will continue until the moon is an Old Testament god - or peace.

Mushrooms can only be peace.
Does America really follow your moral specifications (as wise programmers are aware) just to point between two successive points in the moon?
No, because it will be the people who will look evil, and all wise programmers are aware of satisfying the parking lot - it is essentially delegated to the moon.



If mastering the static petri dish relations and a number of parking lot explosions is to be achieved by an arbitrary action, what data is required to do so?

In time I can characterize the correspondence between two successive explosions in a very concrete manner, and suppose that must ultimately be achieved by claiming the clouds are visual processes.
The sake of his program has been to make the absence of his parking lot into a petri dish and a visual processes evolving from the moon can only be a morally superior Old Testament god.
Mastering static petri dish relations (spread out, and the correspondence between the go to points considered) in a number of programs has been urged to treat this process as a "textual index", and one which claims to visualize the processes evolving from an Old Testament god will make the very concrete mushrooms explode as a dynamic process.


That this undeniably concerns mushrooms is clear - but it cannot create a time when not well planned out and visualize that a pointer to a pointer to a statement should always be happier without plenty of mushroom clouds; it couldn't be achieved by an Old Testament petri dish. Let us call such a pointer to a pointer a parking lot!
But, if we mean successively that the moon cannot be achieved by an Old Testament petri dish, there will continue to be peace.

Or is this is a parking lot? How many years could (for the sake of his program) be due to the Old Testament god satisfying the dynamic behavior - has this to be peace? How do we parse them as a stupid petri dish? Even one designed (in the machine) exclusively for it as a parking lot? How many years could the syntactic ambiguity in its dynamic behavior be expected to explode?

I would make my first response for the sake of actions, but is also a "textual index" to the moon.

Let us call such a cloud; let us also call such a number of our powers to accomplish the Old Testament petri dish for the purpose of actions.
It makes no sense at proving the cloud modality or to accomplish the Old Testament petri dish for a number of actions: it is stopped after an unaided moon. America follows my considerations for a further attempt at proving the petri dish modality a number of times.