natecox

joined 2 years ago
[–] natecox 15 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Sure but that’s not as funny a one-liner.

Real talk though: she went to prison and never once had handcuffs on?

[–] natecox 12 points 2 weeks ago

The truest snowflake.

[–] natecox 31 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

Martha would eventually change her answer, I guess.

[–] natecox 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

One brightly lit, the other descending through shadow with the faint promise of light at the end.

Classic.

[–] natecox 3 points 2 weeks ago

No. Ratcheting stops are one form of winch break (and definitely the most common in modern winches) but it’s not a mandatory inclusion. A winch is just a rope around a drum.

[–] natecox 15 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Also with no ratcheting preventing backspin every once in a while that poor sap in the wheel would miss a step or something and then go for one hell of a ride.

[–] natecox 7 points 2 weeks ago

SC has so much potential. There is real magic in some of the game they have produced; the aesthetic is fantastic and the fundamentals are solid… all of which makes what they’re doing to run the game into the ground so fucking disappointing.

[–] natecox 14 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah the “86 means murder” thing is wild to me. I grew up in the 90’s when that term was weirdly common and it never meant to kill someone; just to kick them out.

[–] natecox 29 points 2 weeks ago

As always: fuck the DNC.

I will never forgive them for denying us a Bernie candidacy and they haven’t made any move to redeem themselves since.

[–] natecox 19 points 3 weeks ago

It still seems like you have to be doing a lot of looking at the controls to use them, which is the whole complaint about a lack of physical buttons.

[–] natecox 10 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I mean… Joel is hand picked for a solo extraction mission to bring the last hope for humanity across the country.

[–] natecox 24 points 1 month ago

“I know a computer word so I’m smarter than an entire generation of people”.

view more: ‹ prev next ›