@NotYourAverageAquarius
13 Years5,000+ PostsAquarius
DXP Survivor 2 Part V (Page 2)
You are on page out of 7 | Reverse Order
If born with money, these people rarely show who they are. They are inclined to let their opportunities slip, or realize them only when it is too late. If, however, people born in this period belong to the lower order of humanity they inclined to lose all sense of honor and principle, and are extremely unreliable, tricky in money matters, dishonest, and unscrupulous in gaining what they desire.
As a lovers these people are full of surprises. They simply cannot be happy or fulfilled unless they are free to do as they like. No matter how deeply in love these people may be, they are never willing to sacrifice their autonomy, but they always put honesty ahead of romance.
In general, it is not true that all people who were born in this time are evil people. In fact, those with the Sun in Aquarius are sometimes ??one set against many?? against great odds or against an institution; for light are at enmity with darkness in the same way that lions are at enmity with hyenas.
Posted by xygeneration
First, it was a general question.Second, so do you only think about yourself or humanity?
I always think about how my actions affect other people...
And if I didn't it's because I didn't think what I did would affect them.
Any other questions?
Ah, I see, a drama lover. 😛
I haven't yet formed an opinion on the topic. I still need to read the debate and pass judgment on it. Maybe then I'll think about it and comment. It is a very interesting subject!
Players: I'll post the challenge around 10PM EST if you're around (depends on my availability). I probably won't announce the winner of the debate until after that since I haven't had time to read it yet.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by xygeneration
First, it was a general question.Second, so do you only think about yourself or humanity?
I always think about how my actions affect other people...
And if I didn't it's because I didn't think what I did would affect them.Any other questions?
Yeah but that is like everyone else. People dont usually think about others. If youre comfortable you wouldnt think for a second where all your shits came from and who made them. Even if you did you'll ignore the thought.
We make choices that fits our comfort.
click to expand
If that were true of all humanity then why would people not buy certain clothing brands simply because they knew it promoted sweat shops for little kids in another country?
How much should one be paid to make an article of clothing they did not design then xygeneration?
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
How much should one be paid to make an article of clothing they did not design then xygeneration?Good question. Do you have an answer?
click to expand
Okay you just answered my question with a question.... so I do not feel compelled to answer you. 🙂
That sorta sounds like communism your talking about there.
Which by the way I might add... is exactly the type of government in which the people your talking about live in.
Posted by xygeneration
So what? You say that Aquas Think of others right? Assuming other ppl too. Then I said equal pay and you reply communism. You think the person below didnt work as hard as the person above
Well depends on how you look at it. I suppose if communism could really work I'd be all for it honestly. But time has only shown that it never works out like how you think it will because the people in power will always abuse it especially in a communist country were they have greater power over the flow of money in the economy.
Well I suppose the point is xy 🙂 if there was no communism no one would be underpaid so gravely as they are in a communist country... However, if you think someone who has designed an article of clothing should only get payed as much as those who are being payed to make the clothing... why design clothes ever? I suppose if you enjoy it that is one thing. But I mean I'm sure it's possible to just invest in machinery that pays no one but the electricity company if need be. Then there is no job for the person who supposedly should get payed as much. I would think if their work is so valuable that they should be payed as an equal to a designer and owner of the company they work for... then they should not be so easily replaced.
So are you suggesting if someone were free of society and there were anarchy that they would be in fact more 'MORAL'?
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Well I suppose the point is xy 🙂 if there was no communism no one would be underpaid so gravely as they are in a communist country... However, if you think someone who has designed an article of clothing should only get payed as much as those who are being payed to make the clothing... why design clothes ever? I suppose if you enjoy it that is one thing. But I mean I'm sure it's possible to just invest in machinery that pays no one but the electricity company if need be. Then there is no job for the person who supposedly should get payed as much. I would think if their work is so valuable that they should be payed as an equal to a designer and owner of the company they work for... then they should not be so easily replaced.What was your answer to the op again?
click to expand
Well he made us choose Morality or Immorality before we even knew what the debate was going to be about.
So I chose Morality.
Then he gave me the position on morality to defend. I suppose I picked it but the nature under which it would be debated I had no idea of prior to the start of the topic.
My answer is yes we are born with innate morality.
It looks like this could be fun to wade into 😄
Feb, Mel, Aquasnoz...any of y'all here?
Posted by feb16aqua
are we skinny dipping again?
Of course! Hope you forgot your suit! 😉
Yeah I just woke up... trying to catch up on the debate! Come on coffee kick in!
LOL! Putting meaning into nothingness since 1985!
Posted by feb16aqua
Oh shit I did! Hey, I can always wear just nyaa's white tank
Feel free
Posted by feb16aqua
are we skinny dipping again?Of course! Hope you forgot your suit! 😉
immoral
click to expand
Now your being Subjective
Each of the following individuals has something in common with Angelina Jolie. Although there are many things you could find each of these has in common with her, there is only one that they, as a group, share in common; understanding this is essential to correctly answering the challenge. And yes, this is sort of a trick question.
The first player to correctly identify what each has in common with her will win 7 points and immunity from the vote that will occur after I post the winner of the debate. If no one is entirely correct, whoever is most correct will be declared the winner of the challenge and receive the points. The challenge will end 23 hours, 59 minutes, 59 seconds after the time stamp on this post unless someone correctly answers it earlier. Good luck!
Al Pacino
Ben Affleck
Clint Eastwood
Daniel Craig
Edward Norton
Johnny Depp
Leonardo DiCaprio
Michael Douglas
Russell Crowe
Tom Cruise
they are all actors? lol
Posted by aquasnoz
they are all actors? lol
That would be a fail under the "there are many things you could find each of these has in common with her, there is only one they, as a group, share in common; understanding this is essential to correctly answering the challenge. And yes, this is sort of a trick question." clause. Keep trying.
They are actors; she is an actress. Good thing wrong answers aren't disqualifying this time 😛
They are all actors?
You should have made it clear that acting was not part of it haha because that is true actually ^.^
Posted by feb16aqua
sort of a trick question? lol sounds like a wheel spinnerI love this guy
Dude bears an uncanny resemblance to someone I know. (Minus the cardigan and with a shorter haircut.)
lol @ dimplez
No, no, no, etc.
fun fact
Angelina??s mom, Marcheline, had feelings for Al Pacino. Morton claims she was in romantic turmoil over her feelings for Pacino and Jon Voight. When Voight proposed, Pacino begged her not to marry him. But Marcheline went along with her mother??s wishes, and chose the more successful of the two men at the time and married Voight. (It really is a small world. Even for famous people.)
Morton also claims Marcheline gave her children the names Angelina and James because they were anagrams of Al Pacino??s full name, Alfredo James Pacino.
Posted by feb16aqua
They're all alive?
She wins haha
Dude we named two things you neglected to say were exempt haha lol
It has nothing to do with their names or (im)morality.
Posted by feb16aqua
It can be so many things.
They've all had sex
They all have peed
They all walk on 2 feet
They all wear shoes
They all breathe air
I don't know why but this shit is cracking me up!
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by feb16aqua
They're all alive?She wins haha
Dude we named two things you neglected to say were exempt haha lol
click to expand
*sigh* lol
Ok, I'll tell you this much: if it's an answer you can come up with without engaging in some research, it's not the answer. Because I know none of you has this information in your head.
I always thought he was a piece of ass.
There's a pattern
I've always hated on him, too, and not for any specific reason I've yet been able to identify.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by feb16aqua
They're all alive?She wins haha
Dude we named two things you neglected to say were exempt haha lol
*sigh* lol
Ok, I'll tell you this much: if it's an answer you can come up with without engaging in some research, it's not the answer. Because I know none of you has this information in your head.
you know...thinking is a dangerous past time for me
le fuuuck
click to expand
And it involves no encoding or decoding or math of any sort, so I just put the kibosh on the rest of your excuses.
I always thought he was a piece of ass.
There's a patternI've always hated on him, too, and not for any specific reason I've yet been able to identify.
click to expand
I honestly did not like his acting at first I guess cause of titanic not really sure to be honest..... But Blood Diamond wow he was fantastic in that movie!
Oh man this challenge has been so entertaining w00t!
I don't know who won the debate yet - I still need to read it.
Are you sure? Secret covert-type agents are not the same as actual CIA agents. In any event, wrong answer; try again!
Another clue: it has nothing to do with any occupation they've ever held in real life.
Posted by xdimplez
if i can defend my argument that they all share a common thread...do i win?
Nope. This isn't a free-for-all. You have to come up with the right answer, not just a right answer.
Posted by xdimplez
Al Pacino- the recruit
Ben Affleck- argo
Clint Eastwood - in the line of fire
Daniel Craig- james bond [sky fall]
Edward Norton- bourne legacy
Johnny Depp- once upon a time in mexico
Leonardo DiCaprio- body of lies
Michael Douglas- the inlaws
Russell Crowe- body of lies
Tom Cruise- knight and day, tropic thunder
angelina jolie- saltthey all played CIA's in those movies. common thread. it may not be your answer, but it is an answer!
😛
if not well..pssshhhh...i dont follow rules, im a freggin leo
Bond is a British agent, dimpz, geez! 😛
lol I'm dieing!!!
Posted by feb16aqua
They all had religious upbringings
Nope
Posted by xdimplez
le fuuuck.they are all control freaks
Pacino definitely is, but I don't know about the rest. Wrong answer anyway.
Well I was about to say all of them while having certain beliefs in their upbringing have mostly stood by a spiritual existence no matter which religion they choose to follow... until... tom cruise... fuck it needs more research.
Seems they vary in terms of political views as well.
Cruise is a Scientologist. Which is supposedly the reason Katie dumped his butt and ran off with the kids.
Posted by feb16aqua
They all met their partners or spouses while shooting a film
Nope. Should have made this a strip challenge...
And nope again to feb.
Did this help you understand your situation?
dxpnet has hosted real conversations like this since 2000. If you value independent communities, you can support the site below.
Every contribution helps keep dxpnet independent and ad-light.
Join the Conversation. Explore Yourself. Connect with Others.
Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →
THE Zodiacal Sign of Aquarius for these natures generally tend to feel very lonely in life. They are over-sensitive, and easily wounded in their feelings. AQUARIANS have great desire for material gain, but are not greedy. They are tireless workers and are willing to work for what they want, and do not demand more than their fair share. They read character instinctively, and for this reason they "see through" people too easily to be really happy.
😢
People who were born in February are not demonstrative in affection, but feel very deeply.
They are usually high-strung, and their nerves are generally overwrought. This people often lose control and then say or do things that they bitterly regret later.
They are generally very active for the public good, and often give all they have to relieve the distress of others.
They are good thinkers, and are very successful when it comes to debate and argument, and difficult to convince.😉
They are excellent in business and finance when they apply their minds to such things, but usually they are more successful for others, and make more money for other people than for themselves. Such people are a seekers of knowledge, rational, open-minded, gifted with breadth of vision.
If people born in this sign manage overcame their sensitiveness and developed their will-power, there is no position they would not be able to attain.They are usually successful in some large sphere of action, where they can feel their responsibilities for others. As an idealist AQUARIANS would like to see that everybody is happy and their ambition is to do something important and meaningful.
They take a great interest in public meetings, gatherings of people, and public ceremonies. In spite of the fact that such people love theatres and concerts, and like to be where crowds of people congregate, they often feel lonely.