Pete_the_Viscous

Well, if God existed (i.e. Christian God in particular) then I'd worship them, yes; the idea of that god is that it's one whose followers worship them... and that all people should be followers. Of course, I don't believe God exists, so it's a moot point, and you won't find me doing any worshipping. I'm not strictly an atheist--for all I know, a god could exist, and just isn't talking to me--but that(^^^)'s what I'd do. As I say, I don't think there is a god... but if there is and the Christians in this world are right--including about how some of them act--then I wouldn't worship him, as I don't like they way he does things. So, to clarify that a bit: idealistically, yes--that god would be worth worshipping; realistically, no--I don't see any reason to worship whatever god is (if there is one) in control right now.

I don't think they should re-make it. Part of the charm of FFVII was in the cartoony bad graphics, which they would no doubt lose in favor of "photo-realistic" ones. If anything, I think they should simply make FFVII available as-is.

As How2PK said, it's not the bikes that are doing the riding, it's the people on them. They may be the most annoying vehicles in the world--maybe they make a particularly annoying noise--but I imagine they aren't as annoying in this situation as, say, an ice cream van doing the same thing; or a hugely "modded" car (i.e. one on which the exhaust is broken) that makes a much louder noise. In any case, it's the fault of the person driving/riding it there, not the vehicle, which might be very annoying for another reason. Anyway, if you ask me, how annoying a vehicle is depends on one's mood.

How do you define difficulty of learning languages? Amount of grammar rules and exceptions? Well, for example English only has "the" in front of nouns. Swedish has "Det" and "Den". German has "Der", "Das", "Die". Obviously many languages have even more. Well... though the word "the" is spelled the same each time, it is pronounced differently (you know: thee alien fired thuh ray-gun). Then, of course, there's "a" and "an"--it's not a gender thing, but it amounts to the same, really. Someone mentioned something about Spanish and French being easier to learn when you have learnt the other one of the two--that's true; it's the same with all languages that derive from the same source. That's one of the things that's different about English, though: we have the latin influence... but also all the other languages are there, too (I don't know what it's called but "Viking/Norse", for example), which is possibly what gives rise to most of the odd, contradictory rules. I gather that French is a language rather unwilling to be influenced by its neighbours--as such it's closer to how it started out. My father (whose first language was Hakka) tells me that English sounds, to people who don't know it, much like other languages with viking influences--rather than like French or Spanish. I personally find French the hardest to learn, as I can't make the sounds without feeling like an idiot--this is not to say that French people speaking French sound like idiots, or that the language itself sounds idiotic. German is easy to learn (I found) when one knows English, as a lot of the sounds are the same, and the rules of how to make those sounds--other than, of course, the w/v business. Besides... there's an incentive to learn German: it sounds so rude. I'd give an example of what I mean, but it'd be taken out by the censor. If I were to continue learning a language--which I shall do one day--it'd first be German, then Welsh, then others. To be honest I think the difficulty of one language depends almost entirely on what languages one already knows. I think that most people encounter English very often, so are already used to the sound of it by the time they come to learn it--to people who don't have this advantage--or the knowledge of other, similar languages--it might be harder than other languages. Possibly. Another thing is that, while lots of people speak other languages, most don't know the language up to a standard at which they can make judgements on how complicated it is. I, for one, don't know English well enough to comment on the more complex aspects of it--and it's my first language. I imagine it's true of all languages.

Do be careful if you're going to do aluminium: I seem to remember that it can explode when you heat/melt it. I'd read up about that before you go doing anything with aluminium. What I suggest you start with is lead, as it also has a very low melting point, and is far less dangerous--even if it is poisonous; you're not exactly going to be drinking it, are you?

...I'm torn between "Chief procrastinator", "Lord high comfy chair tester" and "the man whose job title no-body knows, but seems to be making a curiously large amount of money". Seriously, though, I don't know what I want to be--I don't think I'll know until I've at least had a go at doing some of them.

At least one thing they thought they would never like--that way they can say they gave it a try. No specifics, really--there are too many that I think people should listen to for me to even start deciding. Saying that, Stairway to heaven was a good example :).

Let me see.... apart from all the moths: Two cards--cash and blood-donor ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã"some" a bank statement.... no, wait... half a bank statement. Fluff.

Makes me wonder what having a number one is worth, if coldplay can't get it with their song, but the crazy frog can. Or rather, it would make me wonder that: I've never thought much of music charts.

Anyone who doesn't, read the "the order of the stick" comics... right now. They're D&D based, but funny even to people who don't know the rules. Read The order of the stick, episode 44 for more on the dark elf business. For anyone who doesn't want to read that: Yes, they're meant to be evil... but since Drizzt, everyone wants to make a duel scimitar wielding, chaotic good dark elf. It's like making a sephiroth character. Nowadays, one is more original by making an evil, stupid half-orc than a clever, noble, good one, too.

Ha, that Father Ted episode, yeah, that was good. "They say this is the biggest lingerie department in the country" (Or something like that). ...on topic, no, I've never been lost in a shop. I have, of course, lost track of where someone was in a supermarket, but not become "lost".

I can fall off with spectacular proficiency. I've not ridden a bike for a while now, and suspect that I can no longer do... anything on it, other than ride normally. Mind you, I was never "good" with a bike--not that I've ever tried to be--in the first place.

I'd just like to point out, in case it hasn't already been done, that global warming <> the greenhouse effect. They aren't the same thing. The greenhouse effect is something that can lead to global warming. Personally I think it's a load of rubbish. Yes, the globe might have got warmer. Yes, it might still be doing so. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's because we burn fossil fuels, or anything like that. It's certainly true that it is a contributing factor, but not that it's the only one... or even the biggest. One thing to take into account is that we're coming out of an ice age still. The world is bound to get warmer. Whatever happens, it's not enough to stop burning fossil fuels, or to live in wooden houses, wear wooden underpants or whatever it is they suggest we do: it's going to happen naturally, regardless. If species have adapted to the current climate, then they can b_____ well adapt to the changing climate too--it's not as if we can stop it changing, so all we can do is help them do either adapt, or keep them in man made climates/shift them around the world to places where they'll do better. *this one Edit: Also, how much CO2 do we produce? ...I'm going to assume you know which past CO2 changes they're on about, otherwise you wouldn't be discussing this (if you don't know which ones, look it up, it's interesting). Are we meant to believe that our use of fossil fuels causes a bigger change in the Earth's CO2 levels than the ones that allowed plant life to develop?

I think because I'd seen it being played by my brother, and also read something about it in a mag. I wasn't (or rather, my parents weren't) willing to pay for UO, so I had a look at it. I won't say "and the rest is history", because it didn't really work out, and I played it intermittently for a year or two, "gave up completely" and came back recently. Now I've gone on to WoW, and haven't been on runescape for a while.

Good :), especially the chew broccoli bit. I'm sure darth tater would've been dunnier had I not seen it a little while back on some website--as a mr. potato head. The egg troupers, too. Must've taken one person a long time, or several people......a shorter time to do that.

It is arguable. I'm not going to argue it, as I don't know anything about him besides his name, but it can still be argued upon. Yeah, I suppose his stuff generates a lot of royalties... but then who do they go to? Surely all this business about his being or not being dead would have warranted an inquiry into where the money went to. I suppose it mysteriously dissapears, and doesn't go to his family/estate? For him to take a cut of it sounds more reasonable, and less risky... but then, would a cut be enough to buy him that secluded island of which all knowledge has been lost?

Still, even that would run out. He wasn't exactly one of th worlds richest people, and the worlds richest people all have money coming in all the time, which he couldn't really, if his talent was music, not, say, invention, or accounting or something.

I don't think so. People like to tell other people that they've seen famous people, and this guy was pretty famous. He can't have been rich enough to buy a secluded island and afford to keep it without working ever again. If he were somewhere where the public go, someone would have told people about it, and the press would find out, and so on. Obviously people with money can buy privacy, but then they can't make more money with which to buy more privacy, and sooner or later said privacy (and the money) would run out. Could be wrong, I suppose.

I just disagree with you, that's all--I prefer the old, "complicated" rules. Yeah.. it does give you more versatility, that's true. That doesn't necessarily make it better; I preferred it when it was more restrictive... I just did, and can't really explain it. It is a bit more realistic in the new versions, too. Meh, that's not the point of a game, though, is it? Anyway, just because computer games can't handle the whole imagination doesn't mean that they aren't good. They're good, but not at all the same, that's all. It's like comparing an FPS to actually shooting someone, or an RTS to commanding an army. Oh, for the record, though, they do have explosive runes; they're just not all that well implemented. Actually, it's not explosive runes, is it? Ah well, similar things, like glyphs of warding and the ilk. That, and I like TSR, too.

I certainly have a gambling problem: I'm terrible at it! (OK, it was cheap, but it needed saying).

unfortuanetly that question doesn't work any more (with 3rd and 3.5 comming out recently) I play 3rd even though I prefer 2nd (the one in which putting on armor makes armor class go down as you so beautifully put it) I know what you meant, but actually I regard all the new versions as being "post second edition". I wanted to know if it was 2nd edition... or not. :)

I suppose it's perfectly legal to do it in New York, though? I don't know interesting facts. Useless ones, sure, but not interesting.

It's a shame that they're only (I assume) going to make games with the new rules. They sort of "watered them down" so they'd appeal to more people (not to say that it's no longer a good set of rules, or anything). OK, don't jump on me for being a nerd, or anything, but: I do understand the new rules, but they don't make as much sense, mathematically, as the old ones. I mean, before, the AC system was just a case of adding some numbers together... which it still is, only now there aren't as many negative numbers, which is, I suppose, simpler for most people to grasp, but not as fast. What's more, they went all politically correct and made it so that all races can be all classes... and in this they removed the main advantages of some races, and, instead of just making it more diverse, actually made it a bit of an aesthetic choice what race one plays. * On top of that they got rid of the old multi- and duel-class systems, which were great, and replaced them with the new "each new level you get, you are allowed to decide which class to advance in" thing. All in all, I think they're doing what everyone does these day's who're in it for the money: cut out all the substance and sell the shell to a larger market. That's exaggerating, but it's the same with games like Deus Ex2. You know, I've not played the new rules pen-and-paper, so maybe they're OK for that; they just aren't great for computer games. *ha, if you take this paragraph out of context, it looks like I'm being really racist.

I once saw a stand-up comedy act to that effect. The guy said that when English speaking people go on holiday to a foreign country, instead of learning to speak the language, they speak louder, and insert one or two words from the language of the people they're talking to. The example they gave was (loudly) "Which way to the beach, mein Herr?" Anyway, thismay or may not be useful; it's a load of quizes about English. It's not my second language, so I can't be sure, but I imagine that they would be quite useful in learning to better use some of the odd phrases in English. Click on the numbers next to the samples to actually get to the content.

Just out of interest, which edition are you talking about? Actually no, just asnwer this: If you put on a suit of armour, does your armour class go up, or down?