warren211

Temperatures almost at freezing here in Chicago. Went out to the corner this morning to wait for the bus wearing a hoodie, didn't know how cold it was. Bus came late, everyone at my corner was freezing, and it didn't prove for the entire day. Even now it's cold outside. Usually we don't have it this bad just yet.

There's a reason no one posted in this thread in a month. Logo died. Maybe try reading the last few pages to find out what happened and the differences between DB1 and 2. In a nutshell: /b/ outnumbered us, the drawball changes screwed us up. DB1 is for art, DB2 is for graffiti. End of discussion.

I've heard of obscure communities who think Harry Potter's magic is the spawn of the devil, but... the classics to be banned? That's robbing a community of a great work of literature. I just finished reading Of Mice and Men. Amazing story. Steinbeck knows how to add twists at the perfect times. Probably the shortest novel to ever leave a lasting impression on me. In English class this year we'll be reading To Kill a Mockingbird and the Lord of the Flies, both of which sound like excellent books. To ban them because they go against certain ideals? Ridiculous. In Of Mice and Men, there is only one black character and one female character in the entire book (unless you count Aunt Clara who we don't actually meet). And the other characters toss around the n-word for the black character as though it was the norm. If I'm not mistaken, that was the norm. Slightly derogatory, but not as bad as it is today. Who knows? In 40 or 50 years maybe books containing the word "gay" will be banned too because some historic event will make the word too derogatory to use. People get offended way too easily. Classic literature gives us a glimpse of life before us. What was a common idea back then like the mistreatment of blacks and women is now forbidden in today's society. I wouldn't be surprised of there was some Ameriacn writer who wrote aspiring literature who is never even heard of because his ideals were different and he's now kept a secret.

I'm an Indian guy but am more attracted to white girls than girls of my own race. Does that mean my love is forbidden, my life is a mistake, and I'm better off at the bottom of the sea with a large weight tied to my feet than to live the life I do now? Maybe in some more conservative communities and ancient civilizations, yes. But I don't live in those places. I don't see anything wrong with having different tastes in dates. Racism is bringing negativity to a certain race. All you're saying is you prefer not to date people of a certain race.

Yeah, it's old. But I love it. Sony ericsson W600.

Boy: Michael Girl: As someone else said, I'd let the mom decide on this one.

I absentmindedly put things in my fridge when I have things to organize or are in a hurry. I've found a cordless phone, an empty bowl, and a few other things. My mom's kept some 3 year old unopened chicken breast in the freezer.

Sony's game will fail. They'll try to make a similar game with different features so they don't come off as a duplicate of Runescape, and will run out of ideas and crash. They'll get a few thousand curious players who will try it out, then will walk away from it and back to runescape. Sony will have to be really creative to beat Jagex on this one, although I probably shouldn't underestimate such a massive company.

Very naize. :thumbsup: You pked like 2 or 3 guys who had 2 sets of dharok on them. That really sucks for them lol. "Woot, pked full dharok! Gf!" *sees you approaching* "Oh god... oh god... oh no... RETREAT!"

Since we're all being open about our sexuality, I might as well contribute. Even though I'm a straight male, I sometimes peek at others un the urinals or lockers :uhh:

What is with all the negative comments here? Seriously, everything he does is under fire from you guys (no pun intended). Even the place he teles to. I've been in a lot of teams but none as organized as this. Constant streams of fire blasts are annoying to pull off, usually it ends up as being little waves of them with pauses in between because everyone clicks at the same time. Constant attacks are hard to stop, you get little time to heal before more damage comes.

Are the items still placed in order of most valueble on top to least valueble on bottom? Why on earth is the d full helm under the pots and glory and torag legs?

I keep forgetting the item drops are randomized. Every time I see a drop list and a random item appears I wonder why on earth someone would pk with it. Like the rune hally in this case. I was about to reply with "gf hally nub" then remembered the drops were random. Nice pk nonetheless. I've already died twice losing 200k each time so I'm hoping to get a lucky drop some time. Of course, in f2p that might be hard, but still...

I too used to be a huge slayer fan when I was a member. But world hopping is often tough. High demand places with few monsters like Blue dragons at heroes are constantly taken by someone. Finding an empty world is rare. Few people want to waste 5 minutes trying to find an empty world to show courtesy to another player they've never met before. Thats where the competition comes in. You're killing peacefully and a guy 20 levels above you logs in and takes every monster. Well, it was bound to happen sometime. Maybe that player was hopping for a while and couldn't find an empty world so in the end decided to steal one. You shouldn't expect everyone to log in to see you and immediatly hop. You don't know the back story, you only see that it's inconvenient to you.

Hey, that drop is pretty rare. Let's see your corrupted drops.

What makes you so sure Christianity is the right way? It could very well be Hinduism, the Islam or Buddhism. There is proof for neither of them, so what makes Christianity the right one? It is very well possible that if you try to live your life the good way following Christ, you go to hell anyway because Hinduism was right and you ate cows. The more open minded Christians would believe that if you live a moral life, believe that there is some omnicient force out there that we can use as a guide, and respect other religions, then you have just as good of a chance in the afterlife as the next religion. I disagree with people of my own faith when they say anyone who isn't Christian will burn in hell. That's just ridiculous if you ask a me, it's not your fault if your upbringing convinces you that Hinduism or Buddhism or Jainism is the right faith. Different religions seek different goals, but when you get down to it the main one is to live a good, moral life and have an open mind. If Hinduism was the right religion and cows are sacred then oops, I'm screwed. I'll just have to hope Vishnu or Brahma is as forgiving as my God is, and I'm pretty sure they would be if they exist.

Freedom of speech doesn't always mean freedom to talk. And as Nom Anor said, it's only free until it infringes on other's rights. This will be a cheap example, but the constitution does say an unalienable right is the pursuit of happiness. People certainly aren't in the process of pursuing happiness when the kid next to them is swearing in every language he knows and in several he doesn't. And as someone else said, speech that invokes violence crosses the line as well. The law is pretty much well defined.

If the worlds remain so unpopular then it might be possible for RWT'ers to take advantage before they get nerfed and transfer items through pks in hotspots for maximum drops :ohnoes:

Anyone with the time, patience, and skill to spell out such a long sentence with a boy's intestines without being noticed must be some every murderer's role model. As for urban legends, I have one from my old private school. We have a long, spiralling staircase (the school was founded in the late 1800s) and it was rumored that a boy had committed suicide on by jumping off the top stairs down to the bottom and that he haunted the staircase and killed another boy in the 1980s. Never found any evidence of any stair deaths in my school, but a lot of kids who heard it would avoid the stairs :lol:

It's a sick crime, I agree. And I really don't want to turn this into an abortion debate, but it just interests me that a few months earlier and this baby girl would have been perfectly fine to kill in many gruesome, unpleasant ways. But after she's out of the mother? It's a damned life sentence if you harm her. Nevertheless, I fully support him being punished in whatever means necessary, because people who kill babies are sick bastards because they don't have the guts to take on a person who can actually fight back.

A little Jewish girl was asked this question in school a long time ago. Her answer shocked the teacher and she was expelled. If you ask me, she nailed it on the mark. Yes, God create a rock he couldn't move, and he did already. The human soul. If you believe in it, that is. Giving free will to us (again, only if you believe in it) made him powerless to change our ways. He can always guide us in the right direction, he can punish us if we do wrong, but he gave us free will and the only way to end that is to take it away, something he wouldn't do. So he couldn't move it because he wouldn't move it. Go ahead, think it out. I really don't think these "brain teasers" are the best ways to disprove a faith. I (though I support evolution) could also ask that if humans evolved from monkeys then why do monkeys still exist? I never got a good answer for that. And Ginger, it wasn't one person dedicating his life to writing these scriptures. It was many people, often from different parts of the world and different backgrounds, who wrote these. Some of them weren't even Christian like Pliny the Younger who wrote a letter to the emperor Trajan about how Jesus is leading Christians and they are a threat to the empire.

Mark my words, one day a creative history book will have a footnote about bush saying how he sparked an internet fad known as Bushisms. That will make my day. As Ginger said, foreign policy will be the biggest because that pretty much was the definition of his entire term. The books will definitely note how much his ratings change, the fact that he went from an all-time high of 92% to an all time low of 19% is incredible. And rather than political cartoons to teach a lesson about the president, the history books of the future will have motifakes and fail pics like the one above. :|

In 1v1's, you'd have to be either incredibly rich, overly confident, or bat[cabbage] insane to be a mage. I have maged in f2p for a while now. Solo fights are impossible. Fighting a ranger is suicide, fighting a meleer is a waste. You have no defence, you're spell hits 16s, and they will 90% of the time take off their armor and/or wear d'hide and possibly flip on some prayers and you're screwed. Not only that, but mages spend so much on runes and get little value for their effort. The only difference between a level 90 mage and a level 60 is accuracy. The only time a mage is good solo is at lower levels where defence is not as high and the hits of mages are harder than warriors and rangers of the same levels. I had a level 20 mage pure back in the old wildy, he dominated. But eventually the number of kills he got couldn't sustain his rune cost, and when the wildy was removed I retired him. High level mages are only strong in clans. Their bind screws the target if the clan is big enough, their hits pound painfully if the mage can squeeze an attack or two, and they can hit at a long distance. Even then, mages seldom get the kills unless they're high level enough because the rangers are the ones with the constant damage and the meleers have the stronger hits. The good mages are too busy binding to keep their target at bay that they can't get a constant set of attacks, they can just barely squeeze one or two per bind if they are efficient. So really the only lasting mages in f2p are the rich ones who don't mind wasting a few million. But the average player can't sustain it, the chain is just too imbalanced. Empowering warriors with nondegradable weapons isn't the solution, it simply adds to the threat against mages and rangers.

[hide=chain] I referred to your point on the previous page. I really don't understand how they differentiate between using medicine and euthanasia. It might all have to do with their views on the intent of each use of "medication". just for frame of reference I would probably not consider it under any circumstances but i dont feel euthanasia shoudl be illegal. the difference between medicine and euthanaisa would be that medicine is trying to improve/maintain life while euthanasia ends it. From the religious perspective, the general belief as i know is that god decides life and death but we have free will in life. Medicine is trying to maintain our lives free will and such still accepting that God has the power to end it any time. Euthanasia is playing God in a sense that it ends life without God's consent not saying i agree with the above just that its probably similair to the general belief Hypothetical situation. Person is walking across a road, a drunk or speeding driver hits the person resulting in total paralysis / state of vegetation. The person can no longer work, play with friends / children or hold a normal social life. What does that person really have to live for? What is going to make that person want to wake up in the morning? Very little to nothing I think. That situation doesn't contain the case of free will, the person was crossing the road and never decided to be hit by a car resulting in said situation, now how can you argue free will? Same can be said about a person who lives a healthy life, eats a good diet, exercises regularly and doesn't smoke or do other detrimental things to their personal health and then ends up with Cancer or other life threatening diseases. How is that free will or choice, I doubt they'd want Cancer. :| [/hide] The whole point of faith is to not give up so quickly when things look bad. Comas are not imminent death, the person doesn't undergo physical anguish and I'm fairly certain a coma lasts about the blink of an eye for the person under it. Correct me if I'm wrong, I've little experience in the medical world. They're not really suffering, and there is always the chance that they will come back. It might take months or decades, but it's definitely possible and has happened before. There's a difference betwee the two big types of euthanasia. Active euthanasia is inducing death, like poisoning or other methods Kevorkian used. Passive euthanasia is terminating machines or treatments that would only prolong an inevitable death. In the case of the man in the coma it is always reccomended by the church to have faith and keep them alive for as long as possible. But let's face it, not all families can afford to keep someone alive for so long. Turning it off for financial reasons is perfectly fine, you can't jeopardize the rest of your family for the slim chance they'll recover before your money dwindles too low. Turning it off because you can't stand to see them that way? Sounds sort of selfish if you ask me, that you give up so quickly. A loved one is supposed to be there for you in your time of need, not abandon the cause when it looks nearly hopeless. As for cancer and other terminal illnesses, as the church has said, it is fine to terminate treatments that would only prolong an imminent death. Now, does that mean you should inject yourself with poison the moment you get diagnosed with lung cancer? Of course not. Once you're at the stage where medical treatment is necessary to keep you alive, then you're ready to die because if it was 30 or 40 years ago, you'd be dead anyways, and since there isn't a cure yet you'll end up dead no matter what. We can't change moral stance so easily because medicine advances.

^I can only imagine... Are there any other nerd holidays I should be aware of so I can celebrate them? Besides pi day?