|
View Poll Results: What are you pushing? | |||
any 2 (I either need to triple up this hand or fire up another game) | 0 | 0% | |
top 50% Any A,K, Q5+, J7+, T9 | 1 | 5.88% | |
top 35% As,K4,Q9,JT | 6 | 35.29% | |
top 25% 22+,A2,K9, QJ | 4 | 23.53% | |
33+,A5+,KTs, KQ | 1 | 5.88% | |
55+,AT+,A8s,KQs | 5 | 29.41% | |
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
Crap, it won't let me vote for the ones I skipped the first time.
Mark down an extra 'True' for the second one. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
[ QUOTE ]
How surprising that some of the most liberal and irrelgious posters in this forum are druggies. Do you also think being high helps you to play poker better? What about driving a car? [/ QUOTE ] So obvious I hate to say it, but you sound like you really would benefit from smoking a little weed. Or drinking a beer, or taking a valium, etc. Also, I don't get the point of this post, beyond its gratuitous negativity. So you're pointing out that liberal people unburdened by religious mores tend to use drugs more than conservative fundies? No sh*t, Sherlock. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
I voted for false on the driving one--I think it entirely depends on the person. As an extremely occasional pot smoker and extremely regular beer drinker, I would be utterly debilitated by smoking an entire joint but can drive pretty well after drinking several beers.
Also, I would take David Sklansky on heroin and with a piece of rebar through his head over a 1 ptbb micro winner in a deep-stacked game. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
Watson you bumbling fool,
Atheists/agnostics who possess a high IQ and no psychological ailments like schizo, man/dep, etc., are also far less likely to use drugs than the posters here who do, especially if they player poker at higher stakes. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I would take David Sklansky on heroin and with a piece of rebar through his head over a 1 ptbb micro winner in a deep-stacked game. [/ QUOTE ] I predict that David would answer the micro guy on the last question and that you don't understand poker theory as well as you think you do. I'll elaborate later if necessary after others have responded. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
[ QUOTE ]
Watson you bumbling fool, Atheists/agnostics who possess a high IQ and no psychological ailments like schizo, man/dep, etc., are also far less likely to use drugs than the posters here who do, especially if they player poker at higher stakes. [/ QUOTE ] 1) Where did I mention high IQs or whether people play poker or not? 2) Cite please, for a study done on the drug habits of high-stakes poker-playing atheist geniuses. 3) What are you talking about? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Also, I would take David Sklansky on heroin and with a piece of rebar through his head over a 1 ptbb micro winner in a deep-stacked game. [/ QUOTE ] I predict that David would answer the micro guy on the last question and that you don't understand poker theory as well as you think you do. I'll elaborate later if necessary after others have responded. [/ QUOTE ] I predict David Sklansky doesn't give a wet flying rat's fart about this thread. I also predict you don't understand drugs as well as you think you do. And if you think I don't understand poker theory, you should see the guys playing .01/.02 NL at Stars. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
1) how come no one uses drugs 'weekly' here?
2) the results of the sklansky high question are impressive...I'd chip in some $$ to see this happen. Though I guess we need to clarify how high he has to be. To OP - I don't use drugs to think, but solutions to problems do sometimes come to me when i'm using. Of course, they come to me in the shower, too, so I'm not sure that's an endorsement. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
Of course, they come to me in the shower, too, so I'm not sure that's an endorsement.
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Drugs and Thought
I love the drug debates!
BT if I had one suggestion it would be researching the historical reasons for the federal ban on marijuana. The reasons for the legislature might suprise you (hint: the superficial effects of using the drug are not one of them). I think what disgusts me the most about the 'war on drugs' is that emphasis is placed on the wrong drugs. For someone who has no truer experience and has only learned from the government, LSD and marijuana are just as evil as heroin. And that's where the damage to society is done. Drug arrests account for a shocking percentage of prison expenses, and the vast majority are not for truely bad drugs (cocain, heroin) but for harmless ones (marijuana, hallucinogens). You and I pay for that. You and I pay for the seeds of propaganda put out by the government: "alcohol is good, buy it at the state liquor store (so we can tax it). Marijuana will make you a social degenerate." |
|
|