Is Viable, Viable?

wriles

Legend
OK, what the hell is up with the word "viable" being used in just about every place in which "good" or "possible" or "doable" could be placed? IT DOES NOT MAKE YOU SOUND SMART, ESPECIALLY SINCE EVERYONE USES IT! You're not viable in any sense of the word. Below is the definition of "viable."



1. Capable of living, developing, or germinating under favorable conditions.​

2. Capable of living outside the uterus. Used of a fetus or newborn.​



If we plug this definition into the way many of you guys use it we would be saying: Example: "Rogues can definitely be capable of living, developing, or germinating under favorable conditions without a shadowfang and using dual Mcgowans instead."​

Sounds like twinks are most certainly NOT viable given this definition, please stop using this word so liberally!​
 
[font=comic sans ms,cursive]thats not the only definition, it could also mean[/font]

[font=comic sans ms,cursive]feasible, practicable, workable.[/font]​



[font=comic sans ms,cursive]people these days.[/font]​
 
your logic aint so viable, wriles, bro.
 
wriles said:
OK, what the hell is up with the word "viable" being used in just about every place in which "good" or "possible" or "doable" could be placed? IT DOES NOT MAKE YOU SOUND SMART, ESPECIALLY SINCE EVERYONE USES IT! You're not viable in any sense of the word. Below is the definition of "viable."





1. Capable of living, developing, or germinating under favorable conditions.​

2. Capable of living outside the uterus. Used of a fetus or newborn.​



If we plug this definition into the way many of you guys use it we would be saying: Example: "Rogues can definitely be capable of living, developing, or germinating under favorable conditions without a shadowfang and using dual Mcgowans instead."​

Sounds like twinks are most certainly NOT viable given this definition, please stop using this word so liberally!​
Click to expand...



2vv5s3s.jpg
 
Well if we are going to be using definitions from now on...



"Twink" is a *** slang term describing a young or young-looking *** man (18–23 age category) with a slender, ectomorph build, little or no body hair, and nofacial hair.[sup][4][/sup][sup][5][/sup] In some societies, the term chick or chicken is preferred.[sup][6][/sup] The related term twinkle-toes, which implies that a man is effeminate, tends to be used in a derogatory manner.[sup][7][/sup] The terms can be complimentary or pejorative.[sup][8][9][/sup]
 
Overpoweredqt said:
Well if we are going to be using definitions from now on...



"Twink" is a *** slang term describing a young or young-looking *** man (18–23 age category) with a slender, ectomorph build, little or no body hair, and nofacial hair.[sup][4][/sup][sup][5][/sup] In some societies, the term chick or chicken is preferred.[sup][6][/sup] The related term twinkle-toes, which implies that a man is effeminate, tends to be used in a derogatory manner.[sup][7][/sup] The terms can be complimentary or pejorative.[sup][8][9][/sup]
Click to expand...

Now thats viable!
 
that lock baffles me tho, I thought sp to bracers would be better than the stam for a lock, since as a dps class having ur dots hit harder would be better than a small amount of hp gain. Also the belt, why the stam belt? Idk maybe he just logged out wearing his stam set or something or is using that until he gets lucky and gets a better on from a satchel. Im no lock expert tho, maybe they do need more hp for survivability or something. Oh and 100 hp to chest instead of 4 stats, the 4 stats would be better wouldnt it? 4 int would provide a small amount of crit and sp, also the staff enchant, I thought 30 sp was better than 22 int for a lock because the sp is more important for dots, and you could always life tap or w/e its called for more mana when low. Not hating on him or anything, im just a noob wondering why he chose that setup for his lock, would liek to learn a thing or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top