Ginger_Warrior

Hmm... you all speak very good points that I hadn't really considered, and you're all right. With hindsight, even with the BIG benefit it would have, the downsides far outweigh this. Just one point I'd like to touch on: Fair enough, you've chosen to play RS, but can you honestly say that every single thing in RS is better than WoW (apart from graphics, which is fairly obvious)? This attitude annoys me, because like it or not, RSers are gonna have to accept that there are some things the designers of WoW do better than the Gowers, simply because they have more experience, and that the Gowers really should look towards them for inspiration instead of digging their heels in the sand, with the majority of the RS community blindly supporting them with an almost war-like patriotism. I'm also sorry to say they probably do more things right than the Gowers, as is shown by the sheer comparison in the games' relative populations. I'm sorry to wake some RSers up here, but no other MMORPG has the same behavioural problems with its community as RS! Is perhaps the fact we can world-hop the main reason for this, and if so, if not RS be made into a one-server game, should the extent to which we can world-hop be limited, in order to make rule-breakers and generally unpleasent people accountable for their actions? And if so, would it actually work anyway?

Lol, how weird that we're talking about high, rich players getting let off lightly with Paris Hilton at the moment... I personally feel that rules are rules are rules. Aside from the fact they'd be stupid to cheat at such a distinguished level, it also raises questions about how honest the methods were they used to get there in the first place, so they should be delivered the same heavy hand as every other players. It's only fair. Above all else, if Jagex published a notice saying they'd banned a level 126 player, can you imagine the psychological effect it would have on some less-persuaded macroers? They'd eventually learn that the days of Jagex turning a blind-eye to rule-breaing are over, and that rule breakers have no place in RS whatsoever.

I only have an advanced knowledge of Genetics and Chemistry, certainly nto a degree-standard education, but the compound mentioned contains benzene, which is actually radioactive. It would make sense that this would change DNA, since benzene is a carcinogenic molecule. However, as I said, I wouldn't know and that's purely speculative. If it's in softdrinks, chances are whatever chemist that tested the drink would have been aware of the compound, and verified that it wasn't actually harmful. This seems like a case of media exaggeration, if I'm perfectly honest.

Not being a US citizen, I wouldn't know where you are in your academic life. Although, basic calculus is done here at AS Level, which is about 16-17 year olds. Would that be correct? My first and foremost advice would be not to make a definite decision until you've received your exam marks. I hear it all the time at my college in the UK, "I'm gonna drop subject X, and go for career Y". Well, don't be so stupid. The fact is you can't know what you're good in or what your options are for furthering your education until you actually know your marks, since as these are key for unlocking options. I would start thinking of a back-up subject. For example, I want to do Medicine in two years at university. However, I need a back-up just in case I fail to get into University. In my case, it's Pharmacy. Make your mind up about what you want to do just in case you can't be a teacher, and wait until your receive your final results before making any rash and hasty decisions regarding your career. I hope that helps. :)

Why bring anything? The war would still be going on for five more years, chances are I wouldn't live to enjoy whatever I brought anyway... BTW, in reply to a comment I saw before, persecution of minorites in Nazi Germany was happening WAY before the 1940s. 9-10 November, 1938 (Kristallnacht) is an example of this, plus the arresting of 100,000 political opponents in 1933 alone. As far as the Jews went, following Kristallnacht they may as well not have been a part of Germany - the only thing they had left was their life.

Urgh... more Harry Potter! 'Nuff said. That's a disagree with the proposal for those who can't pick up...

No, but they are alike in that they're both in a sticky situation. I'll criticise Bush all I want, but I have to accept he was given an incredibly difficult situation. However, out of all the options that were presented to him, starting a War on Terror and not clarrifying it between that and a War on Islamic Extremism was probably the worst pathway he could have took. As it happens, his actions have probably created more terrorists than disposed of, through alienation of a few young Muslims in the Middle-East. That is the problem I have with George Bush's foreign policy. Not only is it fairly brutal, it's also self-defeating, and thus unneccesary.

Above all else, he was only in power for nine months when it happened. It would need more time to organise than that. Firstly, the word 'Terrorism' is often confused with 'Islamic Radicalism'. The two are completely different things, but seem to have gotten confused together. The fact is, terrorism was happening WAY before 9/11. The IRA, for example. Secondly, the concept of a 'War of Terror' is idiotic. It's an ideology, and as proven in the Cold War, you can't crush an ideology. The reason is because it's not a physical substance - it's a mindset. In fact, the more you attack something, the more people become sympathetic of whatever it is you're trying to attack, so in essence you actually fuel the ideology, and not destroy it.

That's amazing. We can too. In fact, we were voting before your nation was even born! As for your comments about the War on Terror. There is no need to detain people for accusations of terrorism than any other accusation. If you have so much confidence in your intelligence services, you'd allow them the right to a trial before locking them up. On a side note, how can you have a War on Terror? Terrorism is an ideology, not a factual substance. It reminds me somewhat of the Truman Doctrine (aka, the war on Soviet-style communism). Yet, you failed at suppressing that too. The reason is quite obvious. You can't eliminate an ideology. It's in people's minds and the more you attack it, the more sympathetic people get to the very thing you're trying to quash. So as far as you're concerned, you've actually made things worse, and not better. I have no doubt there are more so-called 'terrorists' now than there were pre-9/11, thanks to this 'war'.

Description - You want government out of your personal life. On the other hand, you want more government in your economic life. This puts you closest to either the Green Party or the radical wing of the Democratic Party. You might even consider yourself a socialist, or a ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬ÅtrueÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬ÃâÃ

guess that sums this entire topic up. Go and learn some geography. It's called a typo...

Or they are just thrown into one of the "jails" which are totally against all human rights :P Ahh... long live American freedom!!! [/sarcasm]

I want to add a point onto Agunimon979's rather 'interesting' post. Converting to renewable resources of energy would only have a very TINY impact on all of our carbon footprints. I can't remember all that well, but I think according to the Ethical Man (on Newsnight, UK), it would only cut down our footprint by 5%. This isn't a case of switching to renewable energy and that's it, problem solved. This may sounds controversial, but car drivers will ultimately have to realise that, although it's not against the law to drive a car, you don't really have a right to, and inevitably you WILL have to turn to public transport. If not sooner, later. It's gone beyond the point where people can turn around to scientists who will know far more than oradinary people ver will and say "I don't care, I'm not gonna be around long enough to face up to my actions; and I have a right to drive, so try and stop me!". In fact, all of us really should feel guilty for using a computer to post here in the first place. This is the kind of attitude people have to get into, and you can fight it off for as long as you like, you will have to adopt it eventually.

Regrettably, it's worse in the UK. Thanks to the new ASBOs, it's automatically in the mindset of near enough everyone that group of kids can't get together without drinking down 23 units of alcopops and smashing telephone boxes up. Unfortunetely, it's even worse if a group of asian lads get together, people literally cross the road so as not to go through them. It's mindless paranoia, and yeah, it annoys me. Especially when A Level exam results are publically released with 50% of young people going to uni, and then they try and play it down saying "Owww they're just easy nowadays". Can't any of us do any right?

You mean all *counts* one of the questions I left open for discussion in my last post? And, no it doesn't. He's just one developer, and believe me there are dozens more chorusing that the PS3 is a nightmare to code and they find it a real turn-off. As far as I'm concerned, I can stick an XBox 360 and a PS3 together, and there's a marginal difference in terms how games look/run on them, yet one costs ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã200 less. I would agree with Bubsa. The PS3 is, to all intent and purposes, almost a carbon-copy of the PS2 with 256 bytes.

OK, Chris Ashton on his way to your game from ours at the end of this season. In addition, Robinson and Farrell, not only both from League, but Wigan legends in themselves. You can laugh at our team. I do too, our team doesn't even stand at the same level against the Aussies. But name me a sport in which England does ATM apart from football. However, I only rate three players in your international team. Wilkinson, who is without doubt the greatest kicker on either side of the code, Robinson and Farrell, who as mentioned before came from League. In essence, you're buying our players to give your code a much-needed injection of pace and agility, instead of the mindless kicking duel it was during the '03 World Cup. Gates up by some 14% last season in Super League. Companies like Setanta preparing to bid against Sky for Super League rights. The BBC giving full acknowledgement of the Challenge Cup. The average attendance in League games higher than Sale Sharks' average. Wigan's average attendance dwarfing the Sharks' average. Yup, I'd say we're doing pretty well for ourselves...

You've missed my point... do you actually know why they did it or what those signs represent?

It just seems a strange concept to the word 'Memorial'. It's nice to know you were thinking of your troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and past wars while partying 'till 2 in the morning...

I didn't even bother to read this article. The reason? It's clear this guy would say nothing bad about SONY, and is clearly living in the clouds. The console war is a run-off between SONY and Microsoft? Which is why the Wii is outselling both... :-s The second reason is his blatent bias against the Wii. He couldn't help mentioning the old 'age-group' argument here could he? The fact is, I know a damn sight more over 16s wanting a Wii than under 16s. It really has appealed to the older generation, the people that were brought up on the NES/Amiga with its Virtual Console Feature. Additionally, I agree, multiplayer gaming isn't really doable on the Wii right now. However, I have no doubt that when Battle Revolution comes out with NWC, millions of PokÃÆÃâÃâémon fans will be battling online, just as they are with Diamond/Pearl now. As the poster before me said, loads of people were scepticle, myself included, of the direction Ninty were taking with the DS. They proved me wrong, it's been a massive success. As for the PS3 itself, well it's all very dandy him telling us the PS3's great with his six-figure salary. The fact is, the teenage audience the PS has so thrived off won't be able to afford the extortionate pricing of the PS3. At ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã450 a throw, I would certainly hope the PS3's online play is free!!! Especially considering I can pick up a DS and a USB Adaptor for ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã120, and I'm up and running online. Also, the PS3's a good ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã200 more than the others, and for what? Can someone please explain to me what the PS3 has that the XBox doesn't (and don't say Blu-Ray, no-one can use it)? As I said, I didn't read the whole article, but I doubt I needed to. It was clear this guy was never gonna say a bad word about PS3, and was never even going to mention the success of Nintendo the past two years under Satoru Iwata.

I read this at 11:11. :lol: edit: on my work machine that is. [omg]! :shock: I'm... confused. :? :shock: ? If this isn't spam, I really don't know what is... BTW, if you want your thread to be locked, PMing the mod of the board to lock it usually gets it locked post-haste.

I'm not a US citizen, but Mortal Kombat on Memorial Day? I'm sure that would offend quite a few Americans...

^ The point remains, we don't actually know what their symbols meant. We're just presuming it's Nazism or Peace. It could also be a sing of Hinduism. We just don't know...

Which is why I've supported Man Utd all my life, and detested Chelsea's dominance of the league for the past two years... :-s And I haven't contradicted myself. Just because a team wins the Cup doesn't make them the best team in Europe. Wow, they can win a dozen games a season... that proves nothing. If you'd have bothered to read ALL my posts, you'd see I explain why Liverpool did so 'well', and Chelsea and Man Utd didn't fulfill their expectations. And why should I support PNE? If you're gonna give me that lecture about supporting your local team, half the people in Preston support Liverpool anyway. No exaggeration. Plus, they're not a team. They have one good player (Nugent) who will no doubt be in the Premiership next season with a different club. Then it's bye bye PNE's dreams of promotion so far as I'm concerned. I'm sorry, PNE had the playoffs set up for them, and they still blew it. Why on earth would I support a team as bad as that? I'm not a fan of 'blind-love'. You don't know me, so refrain from calling me things that aren't true. Really? Because I watch a game at the JJB stadium everyweek called Rugby League and we're flourishing! England didn't deserve to win the last Rugby Union world cup, they flucked it. 'Nuff said.

I don't consider myself a patriot (or even a supporter of the US army in general), but this is still wrong. The Nazis were far worse post-1937 than the US have ever been in their history (except for perhaps Nagasaki and Hiroshima). Therefore, I can't really see the logic behind their protest. If, as the previous poster said, the sign is meant to represent peace, then they're just hypocrits to their own cause. Burning flags and graffiting is itself a break of the peace...

+1 In fact, it's even worse now. At least back then, the media had some kind of responsibility. Nowadays, even if someone's only suspected of being a terrorist (not even charged), their address, name and private love life stories are printed all over the tabloids the following day, as if they still have no right to privacy or silence.