Ginger_Warrior

On a lighter note... The Verve have reformed!!!! :D

As a Labour supporter, I can say proudly that Blair is one of the best Prime Ministers the UK had ever bared witness to. Far from popular belief, he's saved the NHS, restored confidence in the public services, restored the public service itself and regenerated areas hit by the mining closures of the previous Tory government. Yes, he want to Iraq, and I never believed he should have, but what I do know is he made that decision for what he saw as the best for all people concerned. He was wrong, but you can't fault his morals or his heart. He certainly didn't suck up to Bush as many seem to point out. As for Brown? Well, he promises a lot. I obviously hope he can deliver. What satisfies me more with Brown is the fact he's more left wing than Blair, so I'd be happy to see more involvement in the community and a tougher approach towards the change that's needed in the country. Having said that, he just doesn't have the same charisma as Blair. As for the US? Well, he'll certainly challenge their decisions more, and this can only be a good thing. If no country in the world can stand up to America's dominance, then having a country to guide it to less narrow-minded decisions is definietely the next best thing. He's decided to stay in Iraq, and I support him. I'm not patriotic, but the situation in areas where UK troops are based seems to be improving, so I see a purpose in staying there.

:?: I think the only thing proven by this topic is how stupid such a bill would be...

But can't you understand the hypocracy of that statement. You're condeming someone for murder, and then condoning the murder of that person. You're saying something's wrong, then using that wrong yourself to punish someone. The death penalty completely undermines respect for the law.

Well, with fairness there's already a huge anti-American feeling in the middle-East in general anyway - a measure such as this wouldn't make these feelings much stronger. What I absolutely cannot understand is the American attitude towards this though. Iran isn't the same as Iraq, correct. But the resistance that would be encountered from an invasion of Iran would be the same, if not worse since the coutry is actually more developed, and the people aren't nearly as oppressed as they were in Iraq, so the civilian population wouldn't be all that sympathetic towards an American occupation. Also, Iraq is still going on. Attacking Iran in this way is just asking for the situation in the Middle-East to become even more volatile and potentially dangerous to the Western World if such tactics by the Americans go wrong. Americans have also seen the situation in Iraq, and there's a majority that want a fll US withdrawal from Iraq. Yet you want to go back into a war that only promises an even worse situation? Secondly, there's an issue with Russia here. Russia pointed out America's hypocracy regarding nuclear weapons recently when they tried to build a missile defence system in former Soviet land. Russia is becoming increasingly frustrated at America's arrogant attitude to world affairs, and imposing measures on the Middle-East (which affect Russia's economy much more than the US) will only act to worsen these relations. All in all, I see this is an ill-thought, arrogant, counter-productive and hasty attempt to secure America's dominance on the situation in the Middle-east, from a President desperetely seeking opportunities to be remembered in History as a man who did good for the world, instead of ebing remembered for the travesty that has emerged from Iraq .

Well, apparently Ian Huntley's (the murderer of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in the Soham murders) loving it in prison. They say he has good food, a comfortable cell and everything. Then again... this was the Sun reporting it, so I dunno if it take that as a particularly reliable source. :lol:

I too get annoyed at mispelt words (<- spot the pun), but to be honest the problem stems far wider than the RS community. The amount of people I see at college (that place where only the able are supposed to go) writing the possesive context of 'its' as 'it's' is just crazy. Most of them can't write an essay properly either, which I find appalling. Anyways, there's two other things that really annoy me. When you type possesive words, such as, "Look at Ginger_Warr's whip!", just to get, "Look at Ginger_Warr'* whip". The second is when people type out the same number of characters. For example, 'you' being turned into 'joo'. This just makes no sense...

You can't tax an illegal trade... because that in itself legitimises it. Therefore, I don't actually see how anyone could tax the Real World Trading market, since as the property being sold is effectively stolen from Jagex...

I don't mind them... they eat flies. It's probably because we see them on all these films as venomous evil bugs with sharp teeth, who's poison can kill in 30 seconds if the antidote isn't found.

The equivilent version of Pidgeot in the new Diamond/Pearl games. Maybe you meant Swellow?

And is that a personal belief of yours, or something you've got a scientific study for? Agreed. When weighing up the satisfaction of killing someone against the possible punishments, I can't see how a murderer would be more detered because (s)he's gonna be killed after than if the punishment was life in prison.

Just a though about people who support 'pro-punishment', and then go on to say, "They should be shot dead for murder". The two just completely run counter to each other. If you shoot someone dead, that isn't punishing them, as it's not forcing them to think or live with the sin they have caused. Killing them, however, relieves them off their sin. This argument makes little-to-no sense.

Fearne Cotton, Regi Yates, Jo Whiley (basically all from Radio1) and Vernan Kay. Saw them at the BBC Radio 1 Festival at Moor Park, in Preston :) ...opposite my old school :wall:

Interesting argument... so you'll detain them from the public at the tax payers' expense, just to have them killed at the end anyway? I'd understand if you it was to give a chance to reform, or to detain with more humanity, but this argument has no logic behind it whatsoever, apart from the final eight words. I border this response on prejudism actually. You don't need to be a human rights activist (BTW, since when did they all "tree-hug") to have this problem in thinking the death penalty is wrong. We're not saying don't jail them either, do you think we're anarchists? What we're saying is that if you get the wrong person, at least then you have a chance to let them free and live the rest of their life with comparative normality. Under your argument, they're dead, while the real murderer got away. To be honest, it scares me so many people overlook this argument in favour of 'pro-punishment', which is an ancient old argument papers like the Daily Mail have been churning out for donkeys years now. This is the 21st Century - the times of Capital Punishment are thankfully long behind us.

In the UK, I know you'd have a case, as this would be regarded as sexual discrimination in the workplace. However, in the US? I have no idea who would even be reponsible for setting such laws...

Well, if this only applies to Real World item trading (which is against Jagex's rules anyway), then maybe it would actually force Jagex into dealing with this problem. Jagex claims that one of the main reasons is Chinese 'sweatshops', who continuously play the game and then sell RS GP to US-based sites, who then go on to sell the gold. Think about it - the person who is taxed is the person that owns our property. Now, Jagex clearly state that all accounts, in-game items and anything to do with our characters in-game are their property, so if anything gets traded in the Real World, it will be them that pays the bill for it, not the people who are trading. If this is true, then it forces Jagex to actually take note of this problem, and deal with it at its source, instead of waiting for it to filter down into their game and then taking action against high-level accounts who buy the items.

Nice as this idea sounds, F2Pers still wouldn't be satisfied. No offense n F2Pers, but they'd just start complaining that they need other things, like the Duel Arena etc. As for the blackmarks... well that problem could be easily solved if Jagex gave you the opportunity to appeal using more than 400 words and gave more than 30 seconds time per report.

Can I be clear on one thing? There is not one scientist on this Earth that believes Global Warming isn't happening. What the debate is over is how is it being caused. Now, I do the sciences and History at A2 Level at college, and so far as even I can see, the evidence is conclusive. The climate only started changing as rapidly as it is now as soon as the Industrial Revolution started and the need for Coal and Oil plants developed as industrialists moved away from using water wheels as a source of power. The change starts to get even more rapid towards the end of the IR, into the early 20th Century, when cars, planes and tanks were mass-produced, partly escalated by WWII. Going beyond that, the rate becomes even more rapid, as cars become accessible by the working classes in the post-war Western World, and millions of people start to emit their own greenhouse gases. We know Global Warming is happening, and to some extent, we even know what chemicals cause it. What we don't know is the technicalities behind Global Warming, for example, the mechanisms of the photochemical reactions in our atmosphere, and it's only this that scientists really disagree on. When I hear of these 'counter-thories', I see one thing - a load of conservatives that aren't prepared to sacrifice their quality of life for the preservance of future generations, and I find this kind of attitude ignorant.

The death penalty is such an old argument for dealing with criminals. During the past few decades, there have been several miscarriages of justice which have resulted in innocent people being sent to prison. The only silver lining in that is that they're still alive and can be found innocent and released and live an otherwise normal life. The problem with the death penalty is that once they're dead, that's it, you can't go back on that mistake, and you've taken an innocent life while the real criminal got away with it. This is alone is enough for me to say "No!", but throw in the horrific nature of some execution techniques and the fact that you're actually killing someone, and my argument becomes even more enforced in my own mind. The death penalty should NEVER be re-introduced - even at the expense of tax payers' money.

Well, since the main site Tip.It is actually written in Oxford-style English, it's actually "paedophile". Provide me with a link? I heard somewhere (I think BBC News 24) that they were trialing new methods, but that they were quite explicit - it's not castration, it's a drug to remove their sexual arousals by negating the effect of sex hormones. It doesn't reduce their fertility, nor is it a "castration". Personally, I think castration would be going a bit too far the other way...

This is a nice idea on paper, but there's two major flaws here. The first is what's stopping such people training to that slayer level and then continuing to be a nuisance? The second is the practicality of it all. There's some 700+ monsters in RS, can Jagex seriously be bothered to go through every single one of them and slap a slayer requirement on them, especially when, as mentioned in the previous point, it wouldn't have much of a desired effect anyway? One advantage I do see in this is a much easier way to train slayer, which has been long needed.

I've seen worse. There's another group that believes they're the chosen few God will accept into heaven, and that the death of everyone else is a blessing from God to cleanse the Earth. I'd like to see their evidence, but I think it's a bit stupid really.

Why would SONY or especially Nintendo want to be associated with violent murderous games? So far as both companies can see, those kind of games only belong on the X-Box, and to give them their credit, it's what the X-Box does well. In the meantime, SONY's happy enough to stick by its teenage games, and Nintendo's more than happy to appeal to the more broader market. Above all else for Nintendo, they're trying to build the Wii into a console fit for families, both young children and parents. While trying to build such an image, why would they want to be associated with these kind of games?

As far as I know, mind shields can be used at the Skeletal Wyverns, but they have no additional effect than a normal elemental shield, apart from the extra stats it provides. It doesn't have any additional benefits such as reducing the max hit or preventing you from being frozen or any jazz like that.

No, not because it's cute, for one, I actually bred a pichu a couple of minutes ago, and I don't plan on evolving it, since I already have a riachu. This current pichu has volt tackle now \ . Because of me already having a pikachu, I don't want to evolve it (That...and I can't find anymore thunderstones, gonna go underground tonight). Anyway, pikachu...It's quick, and powerful like raichu, just not AS powerful. And it's always nice to stay with the pre-evo's imo, don't know why, but I always liked pikachu for...Pikachu really. :D BTW, I tend not to worry about ground types often at all, they have all fallen to my feet every battle, so ya. :wink: EDIT! Completely forgot the whole reason! EDIT!: Just remembered the real reason... :oops: Ahem. People tend not to evolve their pikachu because of the light ball. Only allowed to be held by a pikachu, it doubles his special attack, even higher than raichu's! This is why when you breed a pikachu holding this item, the special attack volt tackle goes with it. And this is also why trainers tend not to evolve them (Me included). Hope this clears things up! : AHH... thanks for clearing that up. :wink: I always wondered what everyone's obsession with Pikachu was... :-k