User Profile: ECtech


Member Since: May 21, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • April 27, 2015 at 7:54pm

    This is what happens when you accept someone based on (crappy society) looks.
    Some of us choose to look different than your “stereotypical” “Christian” looks.

    Not everyone looks the same, ya’ know. Personally, my hair reaches down to half my back – of course, I realize that many pus**** (i.e. “normal”) people can’t seem to accept that I look different than you.

    Society is seriously pathetic these days. Not everyone looks the same as you – get over it.

  • [1] April 27, 2015 at 7:46pm

    Sue them. This is BS.

  • [2] April 27, 2015 at 7:32pm

    I don’t hate “gays” I just don’t wan’t to hear about it. My cousin is ‘gay’; but be were more than happy to include her and her partner in my Uncles’ wedding. We didn’t care (mostly conservatives here). We are a bit sad that she didn’t “marry” her partner but now she’s married to a man (too much drama she says).
    However, some gays apprently think that it’s OK to disrupt any and all social functions that don’t include them – which is a shame. You all are hurting your “cause.” Why can’t you just accept that most of us accept you as you are?
    Nope, they can’t seem to do that. These days, everything seems to be about “accept me or else.”
    What a shame.

  • [1] April 21, 2015 at 7:53pm

    I didn’t watch the original and I won’t be watching the reboot.

  • April 20, 2015 at 3:09pm

    “The bellhop has $2. And $27 + $2 = $29 so, if the guests originally handed over $30, what happened to the remaining $1?”

    Funny, but incorrect math.

    It should be $27 -$2 = $25 for the rooms and $2 for the bellhop.

  • [420] April 17, 2015 at 6:11pm

    These people are just plain stupid.

    Responses (39) +
  • April 17, 2015 at 2:23pm

    Nothing I’ll ever need to use. My phone has a holder that clips on my belt. I always know where it is.

  • [179] April 15, 2015 at 2:48pm

    What is it about the word “illegal” that Democrats don’t understand?

    Responses (13) +
  • April 10, 2015 at 3:35pm

    A friend and I did worse to a coworker:

    We changed his background image to a gerbil that had the words “for external use only.”

    Then we changed the registry (windows XP) to remove the tab that easily allows you to change the desktop background picture. He wasn’t very happy and called a supervisor about it. A programmer changed it back for him though. They couldn’t prove who did it so we didn’t get any punishment.

  • [4] April 9, 2015 at 4:04pm

    “Researchers at the University of Copenhagen found that by moving your eyes from one electronic device screen to another and back for any length of time can cause similar effects as that of being high…”

    What a crock.

  • April 8, 2015 at 8:24pm

    Minors cannot legally enter into a contract; which the prize agreement is.

  • April 2, 2015 at 2:56pm

    “The ISPs wanted the ability to “Throttle” traffic – allow some websites to get higher bandwidth and others less.”

    No, they didn’t because the internet does NOT work that way. When you set up a website, you can choose the amount of bandwidth as well as the data cap you require – which will change the price. Less bandwidth costs less, of course.

    Furthermore, on broadband website “speed” is a misnomer. It really only matters regarding streaming or downloads.

    “Net Neutrality just keeps the Internet running under the same rules it has been running under up until now – rules that the ISPs were fighting against..”

    No, it was completely unnecessary. The REAL purpose of “NN” was for bureaucrats to get there grubby fingers in the door for (eventual) taxation and possibly worse forms of regulation.

    Don’t even bother going on about how you THINK the internet works – I know exactly how it works because I’m a computer and electronics tech. I advise you to research how the internet actually works so that you can understand why “NN” is nonsense.

  • April 1, 2015 at 2:17pm

    I saw them once. One girl stripped down completely naked and security let her stand there for the duration of the song. It was on the “Girls, Girls, Girls” tour, lol. I think they took her backstage after that. Sure was an interesting and entertaining show.

  • April 1, 2015 at 2:40am

    “The company says a simple microchip, called the SAM L21 32-bit ARM family of micro controller, or MCU, is could add years to your charge by requiring an extremely low amount of power by having different parts of the device work together to complete the tasks users assign.”

    Yeah, that will work nicely provided you never turn the cellphone screen on (it draws a lot more power).

  • [1] March 30, 2015 at 3:06pm

    “On Monday, a new tweet was apparently written by Ashack, which said that her work and her home computers were “hacked,” and that an investigation is underway.”

    I call (obvious) BS on this. Nice try to CYA lady.

  • March 28, 2015 at 4:07pm

    Show me ONE example of a legal website ever being blocked in the U.S.

    ISP’s have no interest in controlling content – but then again, you’re a liar that believes in liars; so I’m not surprised you would believe such nonsense.

    Responses (2) +
  • March 25, 2015 at 8:05pm

    Looks like the people on either side of her didn’t do much better…

  • March 25, 2015 at 3:33pm

    Naw, it’s just that Flash Player is a piece of crap.

  • [2] March 14, 2015 at 9:21pm

    Dushman Kush

    You are a dumbazz and a troll. Do us all a favor and move down to the border in Arizona.

    You’re about as dumb as the bureaucrats in D.C.

  • [4] March 13, 2015 at 7:59pm

    C’mon Blaze, do we HAVE to see a close-up of this witch’s evil mug all the time?

    Geez…gotta’ go find the bleach for my eyes…

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go
Restoring Love