Will H

Eh, that sounds like more effort. Registering your email is a bit of a no brainer, really.

Aren't opioids still used for chronic pain? (Side note: The history of Canada banning opium is pretty interesting)l Carcinogens are produced when you burn pretty much any organic material. The biggest draw to marijuana, I think, is that it has extremely mild potential side-effects compared to prescription drugs. That and for some people it really is a god send. The method of taking it I'm not too knowledgeable on. Smoking it has the advantage of entering the bloodstream directly from the lungs, which means the effects kick in a lot faster. Vaporizers from what I know are a pretty great alternative. But a question: if smoking works best for someone, and they are aware of the dangers or smoking, why should we deny them smoking it? Also, there is a synthetic cannabinoid. It's called Marinol. It's inferior to marijuana though. You seem to have some sort of stereotype of people who smoke, smoke for medicinal reasons, and advocate the legalization of marijuana as pot heads or something. This is simply not true. Marijuana is proven to have medical uses, and I have only so much as seen marijuana twice, never smoked it (probably never will). But yes, there are people who self-diagnose and take it when they don't need it, but this topic isn't about those people. They are, but it's not the same as traditional opium. You shouldn't give it to patients to smoke because that method unnecessarily increases the chances of cancer with no benefit, that's going against the Hippocratic Oath. If a doctor gives you a prescription for anything in the form of an inhaler, you can't get away with going ahead and asking them if there's a form you can smoke instead. Ah, good, so they are making derivatives. It'll be a matter of time before something better comes along, but at least people are making the effort. I know a mixture of people with different relationships with Marijuana, but I appreciate that advocating it stems from thinking about why certain drugs are banned or not, not some kind of 'addiction' to it. I used to think otherwise, but I realise now I was wrong. I'm really trying to separate myself from that perception, but I apologise if I haven't succeeded in doing that in my posts. I'm trying to talk about people who are lying to themselves about Marijuana or lying to the medical system to obtain it legally, but I guess I've gone a bit offtopic. Eh, it was fun.

True, but it shouldn't be used as a treatment when a more ideal solution is available. The question should probably be asked case-by-case, but I'm just wondering how many times the answer is really yes. Times have moved on, and natural remedies are being increasingly overtaken by advances in medicine. It's been like that for a long time now. Morphine is used on a regular basis and it's derived from poppies. I haven't watched the video, but alcohol is much, more dangerous. Pot can help, but it shouldn't be used as a cure. In other cases, as marcus mentioned, it can help deal with chemotherapy. Of course, marijuana isn't going to solve all problems, you can't expect it to do that... People used to use opium, now they use morphine. The best application in medicine would almost certainly come from a derivative, and it almost certainly wouldn't be smoked. For starters, the burning paper alone would introduce carcinogens, so using an inhaler would be much better. I get the feeling I'm ruining people's fun here, but I'm trying to make a point. Don't pretend that you're taking it for medical reasons when you're really doing it only because you like getting high.

"I don't think there's enough pointless threads about bots and google statistics! I know! I'll imitate FailBlog and look up google search suggestions and post those! Look at me!" This thread has no discussion value.

True, but it shouldn't be used as a treatment when a more ideal solution is available. The question should probably be asked case-by-case, but I'm just wondering how many times the answer is really yes. Times have moved on, and natural remedies are being increasingly overtaken by advances in medicine. It's been like that for a long time now.

But here's the question: Is Marijuana the best way to treat the depression or pain? Is there nothing out there that would be more ideal to help with the problem? Somehow, I find the idea that something that comes from a plant grown in someone's backyard, prepared, and smoked is more effective than anything modern medicine has already come up with unlikely. Not impossible, just unlikely. Can someone correct me on this?

you did, it was the part that included easter in the event. looks like jagex missed it too. Equinox celebrations predate zombie jesus anyway, we got a small cameo from the easter bunny and personally I'm glad we didn't have to return to that **** factory again. Mhm, I think Jagex was wise to move on from that. Easter is fundamentally and originally a celebration of the passing of the year from the Winter to the Summer, the time when life appears in nature. The whole easter egg thing is symbolic of that. You can understand why the Christians adopted it. It's neat how the Land of Snow is now part of a larger mythos, I hope to see more of that in the future.

How can you deny that marijuana has medical uses? I mean hell, there are synthetic forms of it that are sold by pharmaceutical companies. Kind of low of you to think that people who suffer pain are using it as an excuse to get weed and don't try to get legal pain killers cause they need their weed. I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of people using weed for medicinal purposes never tried it before they needed it I agree with that (except maybe with your last sentence), but I have a feeling we might have misinterpreted what he said. Doesn't sound like him. Ah, my fault. I should have clarified what the medicinal marijuana argument i was referring to was. It's the idea that it's okay to use it as some kind of self-prescription to treat pain (usually also self-diagnosed), as opposed to going to the doctor. I've seen people do this, and I don't like that. I have no problem with the use of it or its derivatives for the purpose of treating pain (or any treatment for anything for that matter) so long as it has gone through the proper scientific processes and prescribed by a qualified doctor appropriately. I just want people to be honest with themselves here. If you're using it recreationally, be truthful about it if you want to talk about it. If you're using it to treat a medical condition, you should have been diagnosed by a qualified doctor and had it prescribed to you, and there must not be a better method available to treat your condition. Mixing the two, lying about medical conditions to get free/cheap/legal marijuana, is the real crime here. I get far too serious in these threads. Screw it:

What a really awkward subject for a guide. It's basically Tears o' Guthix, Penguins, any xp-granting 'lamps', and visiting resource dungeons whenever they become available. I call it the 'lamp method'. It's a really really hard skill to get into the conventional way in Daemonheim, because of the unique way xp is given in the skill. You end up getting about 20 xp a dungeon, it's silly. You can't make a guide out of this. It's a paragraph that you put at the top of a guide. You know, how about we just define the 'lamp method', because it can be applied to any skill at low to medium levels, and can be used to save money on costlier skills like Summoning, Construction and Prayer. That way, future guides can just put in a link to the article where appropriate. I love how you can get all the way to 33 in one go if you get a decent Tears o' Guthix score then open dungeons and do Penguins in the right order though. That should win. EDIT: Wait, guys, it says 'at least level 33'. I think the idea was to actually go a bit further than that.

I thought that the Easter event was strangely charming, but I thought the Evil Tree plug was a bit unnecessary. Holiday items should be untradable purely decorative things.

Right there is where I'm sold. Jail should be reserved to people who are an actual threat to the public, whether it be for violence, sexual assault, theft, etc. I don't see how sitting in your own home, minding your own business smoking some pot deserves to get you in the big house for a few months/years with people who actually are a threat. It wastes tons of resources and most of these people are completely harmless. Yup, me too. Though I still don't approve of the habitual use of it like I know many people on these forums claim to do, it simply boils down to 'Is this harming me or not?'. If not, legalise it. To medical knowledge, the costs of even the worst case reasonable scenario won't cover the costs of keeping up this ridiculous game of legality. Harder drugs like heroin don't pass this test, because legalising it would increase the workload on healthcare, which in turn affects everyone seeking to use it (longer waiting times etc.). The impact would be even worse for the country if you've got a Universal Healthcare like the UK or Canada, because everyone would take the financial hit even if they never touched a drug in their life. Therefore legalising heroin would harm me, but legalising marijuana wouldn't. In fact, it would probably help me. I'm satisfied with that distinction. That said, I think anyone who buys the medicinal marijuana argument is a delusional idiot who's looking for excuses to make it easier to get their next high. I have no time for those people. Oh, and if you've known me a few years on this forum, yes, I have changed my mind on this issue. I still have never tried Marijuana. I may or may not try it in the future, but I won't let that change my opinion.

This draws a lot of parallels with the issues we have in the UK, but action has to be taken (although America really should cut on it's military spending a bit, although I know you never will). I would say that field trips should be the first in line to be cut, I'd say they're the least cost effective for stimulating children into learning. That's not to say that field trips aren't worthwhile, but the damage would be minimised if they went first. Don't cut teacher's salaries. The motivation of the teachers affects everything that happens in a school. My order of preference of what should be cut first: 1. Eliminate funding for field trips and special events 2. Eliminate funding for new textbooks and materials 3. Eliminate funding for all district arts and music programs 4. Eliminate funding for all district athletic programs 5. Force district employees, including teachers, to take a pay cut

I don't know about you, but my character has plenty of epic stories to tell. Quest cape comes with some. Have to admit, that is true. When you've done enough quests to wear the white and blue cape, the amount of lore you get through is absurd. Even Juna can't bear the sight of me now. "Did I ever tell you about the time I had to bake a cake for the Duke's birthday?"

My God, I'm so tired, I must be delusional. If I didn't know any better, I would think that I just read that someone is making a Runescape movie. Who would be stupid enough to do that and think they could get away with it? Hahahahaha...huh?

Thought it was funny when I saw members wearing dragon items achoppin in f2p... Also I didn't know the evil tree was so... sexy. It's about as bad as the "you are now entering the member's zone" pop-up when you complete a bronze sword request from Aksel in the workshop. Expect to see more of these p2p intrusions on what is supposedly a complete and separate game in the future, way things are going. EDIT: as for the death mechanics being revised, say hello to "casual." Now hang on, you do realise how bad it was a few years ago, before MMG came along, right? This is a very light nudge in comparison. Also, the death mechanics aren't as forgiving as I feared they were going to be when they were first mentioned. Ultimately the idea is to stop the scam where someone drops 4 items with high alchemy values like dragon longswords in the wilderness, so that whoever picks them up will lose items of much greater value when killed. On the other hand, certain aspects like choosing what you want to keep and more liberal respawn points are completely unnecessary.

I personally think that the Clan Camp was a solid update and you're jumping on a very old bandwagon that's falling apart. It did exactly what it was meant to do, bringing clans into a cohesive and standardised system. It saves everyone who want to make a clan a lot of time.

Yeah, it had to be Elvarg. Still a mighty good quest boss after all these years. All of the others I've already had a rematch with (Agrith-Naar, Dagganoth Mother) or weren't memorable enough.

That sounds extremely xenophobic. You don't want Islamic people there because they're different to French culture? While they're at it, why not ban yamaka's and the collars that Catholic priests wear? It is xenophobic and it is Nicholas Sarkozy's stance on things as well: Sarkozy said that the law 'is to protect women from being forced to cover their faces and to uphold France's secular values.' Wearing a face-covering veil is optional in the muslim religion, it is a cultural thing and not really a religious thing. I see what you did there. In that case, Sarkozy is being xenophobic. I find there's perfectly valid argument for banning people from covering their faces in public, but that isn't one of them.

Typical. Guys, tone it down. And Faux, do me a favour and either stop posting or start contributing to the thread. You just linked to a thread irrelevant to this one. Although I'm not sure where the majority is either, I'm not sure how that really matters. The proportion of Muslim women who wear the Burqa is already a very small minority group already. If the ban means that a single Muslim family gives up on forcing their daughter to wear the Burqa, then it's worth it.

My opinion on the subject is probably the most right-wing of all of my views, but I stand by it. I support the ban and wish other countries did the same. I just mostly find it a matter of security, when you are in a space where one person is physically capable of hurting another who they do not know, being able to identify other people is paramount. I also find the whole idea of the Burqa as a purely sexist construct that has no place in this society, no matter how multicultural. I do not tolerate homophobia or racism, so why should I tolerate someone hiding their face from me purely because I'm a male?

Actually, yeah, you're right about the left-to-right thing, I partially retract that statement. You will get a consistent answer (which is of course 288) if you throw it into a good calculator like Wolfram Alpha, but many humans don't approach questions the same way. A question of BIDMAS only seems to pop up when the whoever's asking the question is being intentionally sloppy and a little big annoying. Blah, I should stop caring about these kinds of things.

Carl Sagan? Sounds like something he would say. Easiest way to say it is a googol is one followed by one hundred zeros. A googolplex is one followed by a googol zeros. Googol was also invented by a nine-year-old, when asked to come up with the biggest number they could imagine that wasn't infinity. Youtube is six years old. Yeah.

How can math be ambiguous? Its one answer, no matter what. Or else it wouldn't be math. Questions can be ambiguous. Answers and the maths within can't be ambiguous and still be correct, even if the answer is that the question is ambiguous. The mistake here is with the syntax, not the maths itself. We're not destroying the fabric of causality here, we're just saying that the asker should have typed in a goddamn bracket. I still don't see how this question is even remotely ambiguous. There's a reason why PEMDAS/BIDMAS/whatever exists. I don't know how your experience with math went, but I've always been given expressions with the least possible amount of brackets possible. There is a confusion about whether just the 2 is multiplied by the (9+3), or if the whole 48/2 fraction is multiplied by the (9+3). Division and Multiplication occupy the same 'priority', so it's ambiguous even if BIDMAS gets involved. You wouldn't get this problem if it was fully displayed. The best approach with text equations is 'When in doubt, put brackets in to clarify'. You're not going to get any prizes for efficient text equation writing when it causes this amount of confusion.

How can math be ambiguous? Its one answer, no matter what. Or else it wouldn't be math. Questions can be ambiguous. Answers and the maths within can't be ambiguous and still be correct, even if the answer is that the question is ambiguous. The mistake here is with the syntax, not the maths itself. We're not destroying the fabric of causality here, we're just saying that the asker should have typed in a goddamn bracket.

Is being imaginative against Runescape law or something? An author doesn't give up on writing a book because their characters aren't developed enough in the first chapter, the author looks for the potential in the characters and writes the rest of the book to develop them. Pick where the potential is. I don't see what's so difficult.