|
|
Post by theweatherman on Sept 9, 2010 17:29:10 GMT
Exactly, she rocks so much that I'm amazed Tom isn't dead from over-exposure to awesomeness. I guess as the creator, he's just as awesome.
|
|
|
|
Post by blinkerstoned on Sept 24, 2010 16:17:43 GMT
Does Lord Boxbot have any holy scriptures?
|
|
|
|
Post by blinkerstoned on Sept 24, 2010 16:27:21 GMT
Hmm,no Zimmy worshippers here eh?(She's an eldritch abomination of sorts...heh,like Cthulhu)
|
|
tpman
Full Member
Posts: 161
|
Post by tpman on Dec 11, 2012 7:42:20 GMT
Holy frikkin' barfmonkeys... why couldn't the Beast take a less abominable form? Like, a jaguar made of Geraldo's mustache clippings and razor-wire? No, no... it just HAD to be Boxbot. Can you not see? It is a test! Or Lord Boxbot demands of us we look beyond the physical to see the divine inner nature of the Bot That Is A Box. |
|
|
|
Post by dante on Dec 11, 2012 8:13:18 GMT
Boxbot is apparently in league with necromancers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 11, 2012 9:39:54 GMT
Interesting fact: In LaTeX typesetting system, "\Box\bot" produces  In the arcane realms of formal logic, this formula has the following meaning: 1) The box is a modal operator that represents, depending on what you're trying to model, necessity, knowledge or belief. 2) The "bottom" sign represents falsum, an absurd statement, a contradiction. Therefore, "Boxbot" would mean "knowledge/belief that something absurd is true", "a contradiction holds and always will, in every possible world" or something similarly mind-bending and terrifying. But wait! There's more. The same cold, formal reasoning tells us that once falsum is obtained, everything follows from it easily. Therefore, Boxbot can allow us to infer any statement - even "Boxbot is great and almighty". |
|
|
|
Post by dante on Dec 13, 2012 3:42:54 GMT
Or, the fact that you necessarily derive falsum from the literal 'boxbot' implies that 'boxbot' is false.
|
|
|
|
Post by Xan on Dec 13, 2012 15:45:35 GMT
Or, the fact that you necessarily derive falsum from the literal 'boxbot' implies that 'boxbot' is false. Do not fear the falsum, child. It is a wonderful thing, a cornucopia that yields you whatever you want. The inference you are using here is "boxbot implies falsum", which is equivalent to "not boxbot".. A false boxbot! Let go of this heresy and embrace the one true boxbot. |
|
