Ginger_Warrior

I think I read somewhere that the two most used sources on Wikipedia are al-Jazeera and the BBC. I suppose they'll both "go out of the window" if SOPA comes in, being US-based organisations.

Even those who have "neutral documentation of facts (not opinion)" as one of their core policies? Neutrality on this issue is to report how much opposition there is to it, even the White House disagrees with this bill. It's not to join the mob.

Are you kidding me? In the UK you have to log ten actions a week, and you're whining about three? Today I'm going to (try and) stay away from the Internet. I can't believe as someone who's made over 3,000 contributions to Wikipedia, I can't even edit a bloody page right now to fulfill my voluntary role because a supposedly apolitical website has blacked itself out with 24 hours notice, despite the fact I live in a country which won't even be affected by SOPA. A US blackout I can (kind of) understand, to do it globally is disrupting people who don't need protecting in the first place. Don't get me wrong. I'm vehemently against SOPA. I just find the 'protests' ridiculously misdirected. How about I protest about my public sector pension outside a privately owned business who's got nothing to do with it? Yeah, we'll see how that works out.

I've learnt that "working in a diverse environment" roughly translates to "we'll ask you to do stuff not mentioned in the job description and still expect you to do it."

Snoozing on the bus home from work, when it's freezing cold and dark outside.

I have to admit... I've never actually been to a wedding with an open bar. That idea seems ludicrous to me. I've had a first drink free but that's it. The event costs enough as it is.

Yeah but... even then. Spend it on something that won't be dead in a few hours time. If you're not getting much money, make it worthwhile. The policeman sounds like a right jobsworth. C'est la vie.

Refuting personality differences... so Alpha. :rolleyes: I see your point though.

There's something slightly unstable about someone who feels the need to get wasted every weekend. The occasionally night out is good though.

I think people generally fall into a bit of both, really. It's very nice to put yourself in a box called "alpha" or "beta" and adjust your personality accordingly but reality doesn't work like that. You could say I'm an alpha, being the eldest sibling I've usually got what I wanted from by brother and sister, I've normally achieved highly and other people tend to nominate me for authoritative roles. I don't leave women swooning, I don't see girls as possessions and I tend to work hard at keeping relationships going, though, so you could also say I'm beta.

I'm feeling pretty good. Wasn't a week ago but I'm back to normal.

http://capnbry.net/~bmayland/alchemoney/ Since Alchemy XP gained is relative to the worth of the resulting potion.

The way you relate all your problems to sex is just puerile, it really is. I hate to break it to you, but your sex life ain't the problem. It's suffering from the real problems, no doubt, but it ain't the original problem.

Both the Saints and the Packers fluff their lines? Wow.

You're so pissed about this, you posted it on two different threads. Now that's anger.

Because... that's Facebook and it's a bit voyeuristic. I'll hold my hand up to snooping Facebook pages at times, and I'm sure a lot of people would. It's not healthy but it happens. We all know employers do it to vet job candidates too. I agree about the monogamy thing though. Flirting occasionally I can understand, not that prolifically

Did you read his post? She's the one calling them cute, and she's the one initiating hangouts. There's a big difference. Ahh, I read it wrong. Yeah I'd be concerned that it's bit more than platonic then, but it still something you're not going to get to the bottom of unless you ask her. Getting territorial just gives her a reason to doubt why she's in a relationship with you in the first place. You've still got to stay composed.

I'd go with that: just talk to her about it. Just because other guys are calling her cute doesn't mean she's interested in them, and just because they're asking to meet up doesn't mean that they are, so it's no use ending a relationship when you don't really know what's going on.

She's talking to other guys... must be cheating, right? No.

Exactly.... I'm not sure where we're disagreeing here. We've already established if you know what you're doing in dungeoneering, the XP rates will follow.

Moving away from the discussion about Dungeoneering and bringing it back the original point; we've established that there is one skill in RuneScape which rewards more experience to those who show good teamwork. Sadly, the same skill-related bonus can't be said for skills like Woodcutting, Runecrafting and Firemaking to name but a few. I would expect someone who's chopped ivy to 99 Woodcutting to be just as competent at it as someone who's only 80 Woodcutting. In both cases, you click on the ivy with an axe in your inventory, your character will do it until the ivy's chopped up. There's no requirement for you to 'step up' in order to achieve the highest XP rates, and I think that's the main problem I'm trying to illustrate.

Yeah, I wasn't disputing that a sub-30 floor is easy with a good team. The "good team" part kind of proves what I mean about XP rates rewarding good all-round talent. Doing a sub-30 floor with a team that can't gate and can't communicate properly is a different story. However, the point I was trying to highlight is that Sy's never even attempted it (his dungeoneering level says as much, as does the fact he's not answered the question), so what basis he has to decide how much more difficult/easier it is is questionable to say the least. He's never done it before, what right does he have to make any comment at all about team dungeoneering? It's like me making a comment about tonight's upcoming DKS trip. I've never done DKS before, therefore I'm incapable of backing up any comment I make about it.

Loading up Spotify. "You will now be able to stream 100 hours every month and each track a total of five times." Ffffff.

Have you ever tried keying a sub-30 minute 5:5 c6 large floor? I'm just trying to establish the basis on which you're making that assertion.

You're being slightly disingenuous to the point I was making, since I never made any reference to people's wishes to work in a team or work solo. I agree that in a true RPG, people's personal playing style shouldn't really dictate things too much, but what I actually said was that the gulf in rewards was due to the requirement of talent to complete sub-30 minute large floors in a team of five. It's simply indisputable that five individuals working as a team to beat 5:5 c6 large floors over a set period of time is a lot harder than doing 1:1 c6 medium floors over the same period; therefore the rewards (XP rates) are higher with the former. By the contrary, if "teaming" an activity makes it a lot easier to complete the activity, rather than a lot harder as is the case with dungeoneering, then the rewards per person should decrease by the same magnitude. 'Promoting teamwork' in a skill like firemaking is neither here nor there. What tires people of RuneScape is the grinding of mundane tasks (burning a hundred thousand logs, for example) without there being an alternative for those capable of possessing more than two brain cells. Some people see 99 RuneCrafting as an achievement, I just think they're better at staving off boredom and that the cape says nothing about that person's competencies. The way that RuneScape constructs most of its skills to be irrelevant to the player's own ability is like playing a game of CoD where headshots count the same as bodyshots. Games should attempt to reward talent. RuneScape, for the most part, doesn't.