K4ylan

This thread and "Things that annoy the hell out of you" have both turned into "What I hate about Facebook"

What list did you want to add him to? This is the F2P discussion list, anyone can join in (even is they're P2P).

No...no...he's not.

Unless there is something they're hiding from us, we've been presented with the same evidence. We are just as likely to be biased because of our news sources as the jurors are to be biased because Casey is a white female. There's no way around bias when it comes to stuff like this, so I don't see why officials are an exception. I meant that he was only presented with the facts of her being a bad mother, she's a terrible person, etc, and came to the conclusion that she must also be a murderer. Sorry if I phrased that awkwardly.

You want this thread

^^ meh

No offense to OP, but: You're not on the jury, you're in no way related on the case, so your opinion technically is just biased from what you've seen in the news (same for all of us). You can't reasonably come to a conclusion solely on those facts.

Possible explanation: She was kidnapped by an unknown party, who then contacted the mother and gave her specific instructions to make her look bad in the media and to lie to police, or else they'd kill her baby. That way, it would seem like she did it all along. Then he got scared and killed the girl anyway, and stored her body in the trunk of the mother's car to make it smell like a dead corpse. It was all a prefect, intricate plan. Probably not very realistic, but you don't know. If we based everything off of suspicion, we'd have a lot of innocent people in jail.

You know you can hide people and posts right? I have deleted many people from my Facebook just for that. It's fun to watch them try to re-add me and deny the hell out of it while still remaining nearly equivalent work as trying to block them. Especially when you don't talk to each other. I kept adding and deleting the same kid for weeks before he stopped requesting. When you deny someone, just push the "Don't know this person?" thing or whatever. That way they cannot send you any further requests :thumbup: Yeah, but I wanted to see how long it would take him to realize he keeps requesting the same person.

You know you can hide people and posts right? I have deleted many people from my Facebook just for that. It's fun to watch them try to re-add me and deny the hell out of it while still remaining nearly equivalent work as trying to block them. Especially when you don't talk to each other. I kept adding and deleting the same kid for weeks before he stopped requesting.

I'd just do combat with dungeoneering.

You're right, a lot of people blame the ref because they think a call is unfair, but most of the time it is balanced out. Besides, it's not like the ref is expected to be perfect right? At least in some sports (American Football) you can challenge the ref's call, but other sports you cannot (Basketball) Btw, there is a subsection for sports-related topics.

There not even promoting membership; no free players will go to buy membership because of auras and emotes which are never used.

spent $80 on on fireworks today because they were 70% off. [bleep] yeah

It's been advertised as a newbie item, so I doubt it.

Does this work as a bronze pickaxe/hatchet?

But you save time by walking diagonally, which means by the time you get to the crosswalk I will have crossed while Mr. Proper will still be crossing. Nope. Your point is selfish and missing something. Your objective is crossing the street. Period. You shouldn't walk on the street just like cars shouldn't drive on sidewalks. According to your logic, cars should cut through parks and sidewalks because it's 'faster'. Mr. Proper can go either the Yellow or Blue route and he isn't interfering with traffic, thus NOT pissing people off - because when you diagonally cut-across the street, it's faster to reach your destination but you spend more time on the street - which every pedestrian should try to avoid to ease the flow of traffic. Yeah, you're right. I'm still going to do it though :P It may be illegal to run you over, but it doesn't mean some crazy [wagon] won't do it.

[spoiler=Chrome translation of OP's link]Advocate General opinion in the case "RuneScape" The Hague , 06/28/2011 On June 28, 2011, the Advocate General at the Supreme EJ Hofstee an opinion in the case 'RuneScape' (case number 10/00101 J) Background This conclusion about whether a virtual object that is a good theft (art. 310 Criminal Code) is susceptible. The suspect is a co-defendant along with the then 13-year-old victim taken to the home of the co-defendant. Here they have the victim assaulted and threatened with knives, in order to force the victim to sign on his account in the online game RuneScape. Subsequently, the defendants a virtual amulet and a virtual mask of the victim was transferred to their account. Procedure in court, Supreme court and the court convicted the accused on October 21, 2008 (LJN BG0939 ) for theft, preceded and accompanied by violence and threat to community service for the duration of 160 hours and a suspended juvenile detention for four weeks with a probationary period of two years. The court, the defendant on November 10, 2009 (LJN BK2773 ) appeal also convicted of theft, preceded and accompanied violence and threats to the same punishment. The court is whether the virtual amulet and virtual mask can be considered as a good subject for theft in the affirmative. On behalf of accused is appealed. Mr. RP Snorn, lawyer in Heerenveen, the defendant assisted in cassation. The conclusion of the Advocate General , the Advocate General considers that the virtual amulet and virtual mask can be considered as goods for theft prone. First discusses the Advocate General of the legislative history and the principle of legality. Then he comes to the conclusion that these virtual objects also in the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court has developed criteria for the concept of 'good' standards. Because the virtual objects represent an economic value, both inside and outside the game and are more portable and to individualize. Also a reasonable interpretation of the law opposition is not against the theft of virtual items. This leads to the conclusion that the court applied the correct legal test framework. Further course of the case was referred to the role of 4 October 2011. For now the decision of the Supreme Council on that date. Finally a conclusion is one legal opinion to the Supreme Court. The Advocate General is a member of the public prosecutor at the Supreme Court. The prosecutor at the Supreme Court is an autonomous, independent member of the judiciary. It is not part of the prosecution. The prosecutor at the Supreme Court may on the one Supreme Court case to beoordelen no different outlets than in the context of the claim and is not in a position to give further comment. The Hague, June 28, 2011

It was abuse of power, but that's still an ass thing to do.

Zezima's 30m away from the front page, so he might go for it.

The masses aren't the main problem. It's the gold farming companies that have thousands of bots running at any given time. They aren't worried about how "safe" it is to bot. They are only worried about their profits. If their programs break every update, they will have a much more difficult time obtaining whatever material they need to make a profit. Also, catching every one of their accounts and every account that has ever interacted with their accounts will be a major setback. Jagex at one point in the past IP banned everyone coming from Singapore due to them not respecting internet laws and a lot of credit fraud and hacking's were coming from that location. Maybe they could do this to those places? Problem being that there are legitimate players from those places, which is why they did that in the past, and have since stopped.

They have to buy a license from the game companies? Tbh, it should be the other way around. Who knows how much money they've made from the free advertising.

It's actually on Monday, which is in ~3 hrs 15min for me, 15 minutes for the East Coast.

Actually he didn't play for ranks. He didn't care that he lost his rank to Elias. Get your facts straight kid. How is that a fact exactly? First of all neither you nor anyone on this thread truly knows whether he cares or not. Considering the whole back and forth battle for #1, where he kept switching from slayer and buyables (correct me if I am wrong) every time Elias came close tells me that he cares on some level. It's just a phrase, he doesn't mean it's a definite fact; just a small joke.

I believe so, but don't quote me on that. I know a lot of people were worried about Machinima and RoosterTeeth getting screwed.