Cacmypants
-
Posts
746 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Cacmypants
-
-
tl;dr Seeking a nonviolent solution is the best idea in most cases, but in some, it just isn't an option.
And the only way that a violent solution will work is if you kill everyone and make sure theres no one left standing to hate you. Unfortunatly the USA is now pretty much rellying on a scorched earth policy where more innocent civilians get hurt or killed. Turning people who would otherwise want peace with the US against them.
Theres a simple way to stop the majority of these terrorist orginizations. Stop messing around with other peoples countries, stop keeping tin pot dictators in power simply because they are your tin pot dictator, and actually work on improving the quality of life for people in the mid east rather then lowering it simply for your own ends.
If you keep throwing bullets at them then more innocent people will get caught in the crossfire and that will lead to even more terrorists being created.
*clicks dragon*
-
Deflector makes void mage superior to a full set of ahrims, just repace the void top with ahrim's top. Otherwise full ahrims is superior to void.
-
Joyfully celebrating the killing of a killer who joyfully celebrated killing carries an irony that I hope will not be lost on us.
-Brian McLaren
i think the irony is lost to the vast majority of these tip it forumers
Silly question
The world is like this because history has tainted it beyond repair, but that doesn't mean we should just ideologically give up and proclaim inevitability. For each person who can recognize evil without bias is a step in the right direction for all of us.
I don't understand what you're getting at. Are you suggesting that there is a peaceful solution for absolutely every human conflict?
Make no mistake; I wish there was. But there isn't.
Of course, the mind-set of 6 billion+ people cannot be changed overnight. Humanity may not be mature enough to resolve all problems peacefully at this time, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work towards it.
But if we resolve our problems peacefully, how will we control the population?
Well that sounded awfully controrversial, although if you're serious; populations can be controlled through proper education and social values.
Could you define peacefully? Would you count police arresting protesters as peaceful? if you did then i would say it would be possible but hard to do. If not then i think controlling a people without any form of force would be a complete brainwash of all people entering/living in the nation, and this would just be a unreachable dream at best.
Personally I don't agree with any form of violent coercion, that includes policing. You don't need to brainwash people for them to behave sensibly nor do you have to point a gun at their head, humanity is capable of fair social interaction without intervention. Although I agree that it would be near impossible to adopt such a system at present, society isn't ready for it. Wounds have to be recovered before progress can be made; too bad most wounds seem to be becoming worse.
Here's the problem there always have been, are, and will be people who disagree with you. Also there will always be people who want to stand out and need attention (yes, I think it's natural for everyone to be like this to some extent), some of those people might comite criminal acts or other violent acts the current system indirectly encourages among cerain sectors, people commit crimes because they see it as a favourable alternative, they aren't happy with their lives because they compare it to the successful and see it as an injustice, and they're right, I'd assume most people driven into crime were not given the same opportunities as those who are well off. There's a whole slew of social problems that lead to crime, problems that should be averted much more effectively. Our notion of 'crime' will most likely always exist in some or another, but it can be reduced without force.
The fact is there will always be some dissagrement, some fight, some action that a person will do that requires leads to some force as a result of influences present in the current system and words could not be used. Once you realize that you can work to making a world that needs the least of that as possible.
That edit is pretty much my opinion, though I'm not devaluing yours.
-
I always thought that different people get the kill each time since they do more damage?
-
Bots and mmos go together like bread and butter.
-
I've never used deflect, so I wouldn't know, but it's a 10% reflect, right? It shouldn't be too hard to consistently deflect 10-17 damage if you reduce your defense on purpose. Though it still seems like more of a novelty than a practicality, nothing wrong with that, it's good to mix things up.
-
Silly question
The world is like this because history has tainted it beyond repair, but that doesn't mean we should just ideologically give up and proclaim inevitability. For each person who can recognize evil without bias is a step in the right direction for all of us.
I don't understand what you're getting at. Are you suggesting that there is a peaceful solution for absolutely every human conflict?
Make no mistake; I wish there was. But there isn't.
Of course, the mind-set of 6 billion+ people cannot be changed overnight. Humanity may not be mature enough to resolve all problems peacefully at this time, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work towards it.
But if we resolve our problems peacefully, how will we control the population?
Well that sounded awfully controrversial, although if you're serious; populations can be controlled through proper education and social values.
Could you define peacefully? Would you count police arresting protesters as peaceful? if you did then i would say it would be possible but hard to do. If not then i think controlling a people without any form of force would be a complete brainwash of all people entering/living in the nation, and this would just be a unreachable dream at best.
Personally I don't agree with any form of violent coercion, that includes policing. You don't need to brainwash people for them to behave sensibly nor do you have to point a gun at their head, humanity is capable of fair social interaction without intervention. Although I agree that it would be near impossible to adopt such a system at present, society isn't ready for it. Wounds have to be recovered before progress can be made; too bad most wounds seem to be becoming worse.
-
Silly question
The world is like this because history has tainted it beyond repair, but that doesn't mean we should just ideologically give up and proclaim inevitability. For each person who can recognize evil without bias is a step in the right direction for all of us.
I don't understand what you're getting at. Are you suggesting that there is a peaceful solution for absolutely every human conflict?
Make no mistake; I wish there was. But there isn't.
Of course, the mind-set of 6 billion+ people cannot be changed overnight. Humanity may not be mature enough to resolve all problems peacefully at this time, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work towards it.
But if we resolve our problems peacefully, how will we control the population?
Well that sounded awfully controrversial, although if you're serious; populations can be controlled through proper education and social values.
-
Silly question
The world is like this because history has tainted it beyond repair, but that doesn't mean we should just ideologically give up and proclaim inevitability. For each person who can recognize evil without bias is a step in the right direction for all of us.
I don't understand what you're getting at. Are you suggesting that there is a peaceful solution for absolutely every human conflict?
Make no mistake; I wish there was. But there isn't.
Of course, the mind-set of 6 billion+ people cannot be changed overnight. Humanity may not be mature enough to resolve all problems peacefully at this time, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work towards it.
And we do. But you will never change everyone's mindset. It's impossible. And even while attempting to change mindsets, situations will arise where violence is needed, and history has shown that.
I agree that it's too difficult to alter an adult mind, this is a change that has to occur slowly over many generations without any negative influences in between.
History shouldn't be used to justify violence, the whole point is that we should learn from these mistakes, not repeat them. Where has the violence of the past got us exactly? Right where we are now.
-
Silly question
The world is like this because history has tainted it beyond repair, but that doesn't mean we should just ideologically give up and proclaim inevitability. For each person who can recognize evil without bias is a step in the right direction for all of us.
I don't understand what you're getting at. Are you suggesting that there is a peaceful solution for absolutely every human conflict?
Make no mistake; I wish there was. But there isn't.
Of course, the mind-set of 6 billion+ people cannot be changed overnight. Humanity may not be mature enough to resolve all problems peacefully at this time, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work towards it.
-
I don't need to repeat myself, perspective leads to paradigm, paradigm shapes all opinion.
as far as I'm concerned, governments too are collectively responsible for countless deaths, well over those incured by terrorist attacks. To scorn one and celebrate the other is utter hypocrisy.
You do realize there is a difference between the innocent and the guilty?
I'm not a fan of violence. I disagree with almost all war and military action, but I'm not naive. In this world we live in, sometimes violent action is the most appropriate solution.
Silly question
The world is like this because history has tainted it beyond repair, but that doesn't mean we should just ideologically give up and proclaim inevitability. For each person who can recognize evil without bias is a step in the right direction for all of us.
-
I seem to recall that many Americans were horrified and outraged when people throughout the Middle East started celebrating in the streets after 9/11, and yet I see much the same happening in the US now that bin Laden has been killed. I agree that his death is probably for the best, but the fact that people are hypocritically revelling in it is really quite repulsive. :unsure:
Also, the conspiracy theories already cropping up are going to be a headache, I'm sure. Burying him at sea so quickly was a mistake, IMO, even if the US military took some photos and gathered DNA evidence beforehand.
celebrating the death of innocent civilians == death of a terrorist leader?
It's all about perspective.
Perhaps but thousands of people to one person isn't a perspective.
Would you begrudge people celebrating Hitler's death too?
I don't need to repeat myself, perspective leads to paradigm, paradigm shapes all opinion.
as far as I'm concerned, governments too are collectively responsible for countless deaths, well over those incured by terrorist attacks. To scorn one and celebrate the other is utter hypocrisy.
-
I seem to recall that many Americans were horrified and outraged when people throughout the Middle East started celebrating in the streets after 9/11, and yet I see much the same happening in the US now that bin Laden has been killed. I agree that his death is probably for the best, but the fact that people are hypocritically revelling in it is really quite repulsive. :unsure:
Also, the conspiracy theories already cropping up are going to be a headache, I'm sure. Burying him at sea so quickly was a mistake, IMO, even if the US military took some photos and gathered DNA evidence beforehand.
celebrating the death of innocent civilians == death of a terrorist leader?
It's all about perspective.
-
I think you have the stereotype anarchist in mind (you know, the devious mad-man rolling cartoonish round bombs under tables?). The word just suggests whether someone believes the state is not necessary.
Are you blind? I just said action doesn't mean violence. Bin Laden was ideologically against the state of America, just like you claim to be; that's why I'm using him as an example.
I don't remember attacking you (I'm not blind :sad:)
I should probably clarify:
- Ideological protest -
That's all well and good, the only problem is that those in power (as well as their lap dogs) can easily antagonize you (I've seen this first hand in my own family). This will either lead to you being ignored or ridiculed by the majority. People avoid change, any reason to keep things the way they are is always appealing.
- Violent protest -
You'll pretty much screw yourself over, there is no merit in this. If by chance if you are successful in overthrowing the government, the country is now vulnerable as ever to a worse system than before.
-
One question. Bin laden died this morning. US confirmed this with DNA testing.
Doesn't DNA testing take a minimum of 48 hours though? Just asking, i have no clue myself about it, its just something my friend told me. And doing a quick browse most sites i can find say DNA testing takes 5-14 days.
Also this really does nothing. Sure osama is finally dead. Now his seccessor will probably be the one to plan something even worse against the US in retaliation.
Personally, I think the US government could provoke another major terrorist attack. You know, turn a blind eye while they open the gate to a couple mad dogs they've been riling up for years? Time to point more fingers. Though probably not, it would be an incredibly stupid decision.
-
Action does not always have to be violent, but if you want to let people see the [cabbage], saying it in a whiney-sort of way isn't effective to say the least.
I certainly don't see myself as whiney :unsure: I guess that's what happens when the tone of text is left up to someone elses interpretation.
See, the majority don't listen to anarchists, but our numbers are slowly growing *evil laugh*. I can't believe I just reinforced the stereotype even jokingly.
Usually I view the cliche "I'm scared of people's reactions" line as whiny. Just do.
Anarchists do something, like Bin Laden. Either do something because or else you shouldn't toss that term around.
I think you have the stereotype anarchist in mind (you know, the devious mad-man rolling cartoonish round bombs under tables?). The word just suggests whether someone believes the state is not necessary.
Good. Osama Bin Laden was evil, and his death is long overdue.
(political power grows from the barrel of a gun), calling Osama Bin Laden evil is fine and all, people are entitled to their opinions, but if you support the government as well I see that as a bit hypocritcal.
-
That does make sense *nodnod*
Well if you're choosing between the two, the increased deflection damage will probably be more significant than the slight strength boost, especially if you can compensate with other gear.
-
Action does not always have to be violent, but if you want to let people see the [cabbage], saying it in a whiney-sort of way isn't effective to say the least.
I certainly don't see myself as whiney :unsure: I guess that's what happens when the tone of text is left up to someone elses interpretation.
See, the majority don't listen to anarchists, but our numbers are slowly growing *evil laugh*. I can't believe I just reinforced the stereotype even jokingly.
-
Guys chill, a person who millions of people hated is dead. Was it worth it in the end? Who cares for now, let the people celebrate and see what's next.
That's the exact problem. So if someone was hated by millions, it doesn't necessarily mean they deserved death. You really have to push yourself over a threshold to earn that mark.
Agreed, I'd say it's dangerous to chill (in this context) while the world as we know it edges closer towards collapse. These are merely distractions designed to encourage us into bending over and taking it.
Then stop chilling yourself, get off this forum, and do something about it. Maybe you'll last longer than Bin Laden.
I already said solving problems witrh violence is childish (if you're suggesting that I would go out of my way to bomb some place in the name of X cause). Anyway, the reality is that we have jack all say as individuals. This is the way our society has been conditioned to work, perpetually hammered in via media/propaganda. The most an individual can really do is recognise the BS that goes on around them, and maybe cause others to notice it as well.
-
Well for tasks don't people use proselyte as an upgrade to monks robes anyway?
-
Guys chill, a person who millions of people hated is dead. Was it worth it in the end? Who cares for now, let the people celebrate and see what's next.
That's the exact problem. So if someone was hated by millions, it doesn't necessarily mean they deserved death. You really have to push yourself over a threshold to earn that mark.
Agreed, I'd say it's dangerous to chill (in this context) while the world as we know it edges closer towards collapse. These are merely distractions designed to encourage us into bending over and taking it.
-
I would totally help, but I've only used C++, some JavaScript and a bit of python; don't know much (anything) about Unix.
-
Out of curiousity if you have the ability to obtain bandos why wouldn't you be using void melee w/ deflector instead of monk robes?
http://www.tip.it/runescape/index.php?item1=10637&item2=2030&rs2item_tools=&compare=&submit=Compare
http://www.tip.it/runescape/index.php?item1=10640&item2=2190&rs2item_tools=&compare=&submit=Compare
How significant is the difference of -3 prayer points/+4 str?
*points* point
though I guess monks robes are just a tiny bit easier to replace than (maybe elite) void.
-
Some of these replies are a bit scary tbh.
Not really. They're quite what I expected when one of the biggest terrorists the world has known has been taken down.
The facts about this man are also a bit blurred. As with this report itself.
Please, tell us how you know they are blurred if they are indeed blurred. Surely you wouldn't know the truth either in that case.
and I just respond: You tell me how it's not blurred. Anyone can shift the burden of proof, it's easy.
By not answering what you were asked, and instead trying to turn the question around, it tells me you don't really have an answer. :wink:
And don't try to ask me for an answer on how it's not blurred, because I never claimed to know anything about it, so don't waste your time there. I'm merely pointing out that you're avoiding providing an answer.
I never claimed to have an answer, you probably shouldn't get smug about this, since I proved before that you're just as unsure about the truth as I am.
Void Mage
in Help and Advice
Posted
Void Mage + ahrim top: ~60+ m accuracy with a 30% boost
Full ahrim: ~100+ m accuracy
I don't think the void boost applies to the raw stat, otherwise void mage alone would make very little sense.
As for pvp, you're probably better of hybriding than tailoring a set of gear to max out magic, though you would be hitting consistently high and often, people can counter it if they're prepared. In pvp I believe the chaotic staff is mostly used by mage pures who do not want to raise their attack for a damage boost (it has no attack requirement).