muggiwhplar

I'm fine with serial monogamists... it's a lot more realistic than long-term monogamy, though I still dislike it because of the lack of freedom. I would be happy if most people on this thread switched to serial monogamy rather than holding out for a long-term monogamous partner... the funny thing is that technically everybody here is a serial monogamist already because I don't think anyone here's been married for several years or anything like that :P As far as children go-- like I said to y_guy, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. I've read enough to know that it's possible, but since it's such a far away thing, I don't bother looking too deeply into it. But from what I've read, the poly dynamic would be basically having one committed partner, but you're both still allowed to see other people on the side as long as the other person doesn't know specific details about it. Similarly, one person decides they want to have a child, the other basically says "ok I'll give you a child, but you get to be in charge of everything the child does-- both good and bad. I'll just be here for guidance and support" I think you'll appreciate this: http://blackdragonblog.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/dont-screen-women-instead-categorize/

They should just do what they did for dungeoneering smithing. Nerf the stats on bronze through rune slightly, introduce new armor up till lvl 90/99 which only offers defensive stats (no att/str boosts). or make rune lvl 90 def but boost its stats Just make the ores hard to get like rune currently is for higher level ones. and make the defense stats for 90 similar to barrows, since barrows is degradable but only lvl 70 def req. as long as it doesn't have prayer/offensive stats, it should keep void, proselyte, and bandos useful wouldn't even necessarily have to introduce ores... just adjust level reqs. instead of bronze 1 mith 20 addy 30 rune 40, mith 50 addy 70 rune 90 or something.

Ah. Yes, that's called polyamory :P If anybody cheats in a monogamous relationship, it's no longer monogamous from that point forward There's different degrees of polyamory though, btw... -only having one night stands -only having friends with benefits -having multiple girlfriends -having one primary girlfriend, but with "occasional exceptions," as you put it

What do you mean? is monogamish actually a term that people use or something?

Well, let me ask you this-- If a girl asks her boyfriend to watch a chick flick with her, and he knows for the next 90 minutes he's gonna be bored out of his mind, even though he loves his girlfriend, what do you think they should do?

How? You know I broke up with my girlfriend lol, read my pm. How so? It's like I've said-- since you're not allowed to cheat in monogamy, you're with one person for the rest of your life. A close friend of mine has been dating his girlfriend for about 3 years now, and I've always kind of looked to them as an example of a healthy, mature mono relationship. But even my friend admitted to me that he gets bored having sex with his [very attractive] girlfriend. He loves her to death, but still can't help but wonder what it'd be like if he was allowed to hook up with the girls who hit on him at the bars, and still be with his current girlfriend for love and security. Point being-- if they both understood that sex is just sex-- and that if my friend had a one night stand w/ some girl, he wouldn't love his current girlfriend any less. and she probably wouldn't love him any less either (though she'd probably trust him less hah)... but if they did that, then they would, by definition, no longer be monogamous Any relationship of any kind requires some degree of sacrifice and compromise. If you truly are unable to compromise on anything you'd probably have no friends and be alienated from your family. This reminds me of an argument that someone presented several months back... they shared a link from that "artofmanliness" website (God help me), where it was talking about how people should be able to do favors for each other and not mind doing so in a healthy relationship... and I agree with that. Here's an example from last week-- a friend asked me if I'd help him move furniture over to his new house. I said yes and ended up spending like 5 hours moving stuff with him in the heat, for free. It didn't bother me because I felt good for helping a friend. I don't consider that compromise, even though that's an activity that most people would consider unpleasant. In contrast, one of my closest friends used to be a hardcore drug addict. one time he got in some trouble doing something illegal and basically asked me to bail him out. I said no because I would feel wrong for doing so, even though he's a close friend of mine. while he wasn't happy that I didn't help him, he understood why I didn't and we're still close friends to this day. if he had gotten pissed at me and called me a bad friend, then I would've reluctantly chosen to terminate the friendship. hope those examples make sense/are relevant >_> And what if you never have "an overabundance of wealth and free time"? Not all of us are going to be millionaires... And I presume you'd like to have kids naturally? The woman in such a case would likely be around your age, by which time she'd likely be close to infertility or at very least it would be more difficult to have kids. Not to mention that if you have kids in your forties they might not even be moving out until you're seventy (so you'd still be supporting them). If I am never capable of meeting my required conditions for having kids, then I will never have kids-- I'm doing fine and dandy without them. But I don't think that's how things will turn out :) Like I said-- I know it can be done, but I'm unsure of the logistics right now, and I'm not too concerned about it. I plan on dating girls under 30 for a very, very long time.

Sounds good.

Again, you're assuming that it's impossible to be intimate and have a strong emotional connection if you're poly. It's the same degree of love and intimacy as mono. Poly relationships work as long as you want them to. (By that, I mean you can be poly as long as you want; you can't have poly partners forever in the same way that you can't have mono partners forever). In mono, it usually starts with intimacy/dating, which eventually leads to sex. In poly, it's sex first, which eventually leads to love and intimacy. And you're right about being non-reliant on women. I believe that everyone should be capable of being happy whilst single for long periods of time before pursuing a relationship-- whether poly or mono. My happiest times single were happier than my happiest times with my first girlfriend... I know it's possible to be happy in the long-term w/o a partner, so that's another reason why relationships are "easy" for me-- because there's no fear of failure. But how often does that actually happen? I'd like to ask you the same question: how many people fall in love with a polygamist partner and makes it complicated? How much of such a "free-style" lifestyle causes drama and life issues? If you want to argue with statistics then I guess that is fine, but I'll discontinue because I really don't like statistics. Just understand everybody is different (but the vast majority have weak emotional control) and nobody can state for a fact one system is universally better than another, because the words "individual" and "universal" do not go together. Falling in love is a blessing, it doesn't make things worse. The fact that there's no expectation for things to last forever, and that you're both just going to enjoy things while it lasts is what makes it so awesome. Do we agree that if you have weak emotional control, you're screwed regardless of which arrangement you choose? (We probably disagree where I go on to say that if you have strong emotional control, the structure of monogamy will slowly damage you, whereas poly won't)

Once again, this thread is a poor subset of humanity. You're basing your entire view of monogamy on the immature actions of the angsty teenagers who make up the majority of this thread's posters. I'm basing it on two things: people's actions, and the structure of their relationship. If there's trouble in poly paradise, someone's being a [wagon]. If there's trouble in a mono relationship, two people could be mature and reasonable, but still suffer because of the structure of their relationship. Is this hypothetical or did you actually break up with your girlfriend? :blink: Yes, the two can be identical in some cases. But like I've said, the structures don't always allow that. I'm not entirely sure of what you mean by "effort"-- if it's relevant, I don't believe that a healthy relationship should require things like sacrifice and compromise. I'd like kids... someday. Not till I'm in my 40s at the earliest. I'm very grateful that my parents had me after they retired and were financially secure with lots of free time, so I had an amazing childhood... I don't want to have kids until I've got an overabundance of wealth and free time. With that said, I know it's possible to raise healthy kids in a poly arrangement based on what I've read... however, considering that's something far away from now, I haven't really spent much time researching "how" to do it. I just know that people have been successful with it.

But how often does that actually happen? People who are monogamous and in it for the long haul are usually hoping that they're not wasting their time with the person they're with, and they'd rather grit their teeth and hope that things will improve instead of ending it. Think about the people coming on this thread because they're fighting with their girlfriends-- they'd only end things as a last resort, and even then they'll do it kicking and screaming. And even after breaking up, more often than not they'd still rather be with someone whom they're always fighting with than be alone. The structure of monogamy is based around SCARCITY-- that there's only ONE other person out there for you, and if you don't find him/her and lock them down, you're gonna be alone forever (oh no!) The structure of poly is based around ABUNDANCE-- that there's plenty of other fish in the sea, so it's nearly impossible to be devastated if things don't work out with someone. Additionally, there's no such long-term expectations placed on anybody. Therefore, it is much much easier to end it at any time and cut your losses if things are going south.

Not in my life :P You misunderstand me. Your polygamist lifestyle works for you as it would work for others, but you're using your own experiences as absolute fact that every polygamist person would have a drama-free, stress-free life. But you must know, people (not specifically you or I, but generally) will find an excuse to add drama and [bleep] up their own lives. I think that is what most of us are against your polygamist lifestyle: too many people would [bleep] it completely up just like they [bleep] up monogamist relationships. So continue explaining your polygamist lifestyle to those interested, but don't state is as a universal foolproof philosophy. It has it's problems because of drama and while you may not have it, you surely know people will add it to their polygamist relationship and [bleep] over them and others up. This also goes to stating monogamist relationships being absolutely good because if they weren't, such a thread as this would never of existed. Drama is everywhere because people will always put it there. Its not everywhere in the everybody-everything way, but in the "every concept can be [bleep]ed up by drama" - which yours has a lot where it can go wrong. Yes, you are correct such that everybody is different and some people out there actually LIKE drama (shudders). However, as I described in my post above, the structure of monogamy makes drama practically inevitable, because monogamy by definition includes a list of rules imposed upon two people. The structure of polyamory makes minimal drama possible. If there's drama in polyamory, it's the person's fault, not the structure's. In monogamy, it can be either the person or the structure (usually both). If more people acted the way I do, there'd be less drama in their relationships-- whether poly or mono. But a lot of people actually like drama, so they're screwed either way. However, even if they act the way I do while mono, they're still in for drama. The same can't be said for poly. You may have seen sometimes if I'm being a smartass, I'll reply to someone's problem on this thread by reminding them that this wouldn't be an issue if they were poly. In such cases, their problem is stemming from monogamy, not their own personalities/behaviors. Poly would fix such problems.

To me, that is emotional blackmail. Your forcing them to decide between you and the point of contention. The whole "my way or not at all" approach that I can't stand. (and I do see the irony in my own uncompromising stance on this issue. It was not lost on me :lol:) I was waiting for someone to bring that up :P First off-- I'm not saying that if there's any sort of disagreement, I head for the hills. However, if someone starts acting irrational and angry when expressing disagreement, then I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone who can't discuss things calmly like an adult. As a rule of thumb, when there's any sort of disagreement going on, I pretend a mutual friend or neutral 3rd party is present, and try to imagine how that person would view the situation. Does one person have the right to be upset or not? Are they making mountains out of molehills? My personal code of standards states that I will never, under any conditions, become monogamous with a girl because I know very well that I would be sacrificing my freedom in doing so, and therefore also sacrificing long-term happiness in the process. Thus, when a girl wants me to get monogamous, I would be directly violating my own beliefs by obliging. That wouldn't be "compromise"-- that'd be me caving into her, without her changing at all. Therefore, she has two options: leave (which is sad for me too, mind you); or get used to it (that sounds harsh, but I really can't think of a nicer way to put it lol). The reason why I do this is because it allows me to be in control of my happiness, not her. Similarly, she is also in control of her own happiness too. She can act like an adult and make a well-thought-out decision over a few days and ask herself if it's worth staying with me or not. I'm not forcing anything upon her. The choice is hers. This is different from if I were in a monogamous relationship, where there would be rules imposed on each other, and both people are expected to follow those rules-- rules such as "you're not allowed to see other guys now because I said so!" And what would happen if the girl chose to see other guys? The guy would be unhappy. And by setting such a rule, the guy's happiness is therefore dependent upon her actions, which he cannot control. Here's some examples to hopefully make my thoughts more clear: In a POLY disagreement, where a girl has a code of standards that states she must be exclusive with a guy: Girl: I want to be exclusive. Guy: Sorry, I can't do that. If you can't do that either, then I understand and I wish you the best. *Girl leaves* Both guy and girl are happy because they didn't violate their code of standards. In a POLY disagreement, where a girl does not have a code of standards regarding this issue: Girl: I want to be exclusive. Guy: Sorry, I can't do that. If you can't do that either, then I understand and I wish you the best. *Girl stays* Both guy and girl are happy because they didn't violate their code of standards. In a POLY disagreement, where a girl has a code of standards that states she must be exclusive with a guy: Girl: I want to be exclusive. Guy: Sorry, I can't do that. If you can't do that either, then I understand and I wish you the best. *Girl stays* Girl is unhappy in the relationship because she violated her code of standards. This is her fault, not his.

btw... have any of you read the 4 hour body? if so, have you tried any of the things mentioned in the book?

Figured its just as good to use goliath gloves for a couple specs and I dont own a fire/rhino cape. I also dont have an iron titan. I guess ill just stick to vyres when I feel like power leveling. Better exp at this point and slight profit. Like players, NPCs defense levels regenerate over time. So if you were to use goliaths, you would have to spec a few times every few minutes... Or just BGS every 5 minutes. At least that's how i think it works, best place to test that theory would be sentinels :P That reminds me... I get more XP/hr using only BGS specs, every 5 minutes. I got less xp/hr when I used vine whip + spec restores.

I didn't know crossfit gyms had free weights. One of my old bosses was training to become a firefighter, and all of the training he did was crossfit because it gives you "functional" strength... meaning, strength that will actually benefit you in realistic situations. He made it sound like all the training methods they used were things like flipping tractor tires. I think the only weights they used were kettle bells.

That would be the case if all of my relationships with girls were strictly "friends with benefits." But it's not like that. I care very deeply for all of my friends. There's much more to it than sex. Think about your social circle. Assuming you have more than one close friend, surely you understand that affection isn't a limited commodity? Or that having more than one close friend doesn't mean that you have to sacrifice liking one friend less? Do people with one parent love their mom/dad more than people with two parents? I don't think so.

It's very simple. Note that this principle can apply to basically any other area of your life in order to maintain happiness... If something in your life is making you unhappy, you can either try to change it, try to adapt to it, or try to avoid it. When it comes to relationships, you can't really change another person. And if you try changing yourself, that's usually a bad idea as well. So the answer is simple... when someone is giving me drama and it's getting on my nerves, I simply say, "Would you like me to take you home?"/"Would you like me to leave?" If the answer is yes, then I do. And the drama magically disappears :P About a week later we hang out again as if nothing ever happened. In the mean time, we're both free to hang out with other people. You've gotta have a personal "code" to follow, or a set of standards. I know everybody has something that they cherish-- but the important thing is to always guard it well. Within the context of relationships and friendships, I cherish my freedom and happiness above all else, and monogamy would be a direct violation of this. This is why I'd rather live alone than live with someone else, even if it's one of my best friends whom I'm spending most of my time with. I make it very clear to people in relationships with me that, "This is who I am; this is what I stand for; I would love to get to know you better and do stuff with you, but if you don't agree with what I stand for or feel that we're incompatible, then you're free to go be with someone else at any time and I'll understand" The funny thing is, many girls have told me that they think I'm attractive because of that attitude... so that's reassuring :P A lot of the time relationships become stagnant because of things like tolerance and compromise. [bleep] that-- people should be free to be their truest self, without having to change their own standards to meet someone else's. I believe a healthy relationship should compose of two individuals, crossing paths when they can mutually benefit from fulfilling each other's needs, as opposed to forcing the other to cross paths with you when you need something that they don't. Not in my life :P

Drama doesn't exist in polyamorous relationships (at least, it's practically non-existant when compared to monogamy). That only exists within the realm of monogamy. I value sex and love equally.

inb4 muggi goes bananas I read that line and did a little facepalm myself. Marriage *technically* is the goal here, but don't try to force something that isn't going to work in the end. I'm not saying that it won't work, but just look at the statistics for yourself. Lol-- statistically speaking, Riku is the LEAST likely to consider my input at this point in his relationship so I don't even bother :P Likelihood of people to join the dark side: people that are bored/unhappy with their current relationship > single people (happy) > single people (unhappy) > people in long-term relationships (happy) >>>>>> people in the euphoric, irrational, early stages of a relationship Considering most people that visit this thread are either unhappily single or happily in a relationship, most of my posts fall upon deaf ears lol And for the record, I don't have anything against marriage; just long-term monogamy. as long as you've got a solid pre-nup and both parties are allowed to discretely see other people on the side, marriage is ok. but as we all know, nobody does that :P

edit-- just got 170k att xp this past hour, plus 45k def from titan. for what it's worth, suomi uses DFS and str ammy too. DFS also means less soul splitting (meaning, more AFK'able for me :D)

It's because you didn't use a BGS and you didn't use a charged helm. Titan w/ charged helm adds a minimum of 40k/hr. Charged helm + manual scrolls w/o summon pots is 50k/hr. Never bothered to waste summon pots there I get at least 160k att xp/hr there, plus 40k def xp from titan, using: Charged neitz helm Kiln cape Str ammy Rapier Bandos chestplate Bandos tassets DFS Goliath gloves Dragon boots Zerker ring

at 4:50 it says entangle holds monsters for 40 seconds and players for 20 seconds. meh, like I said I wish they'd just get rid of the combat triangle... it's impossible to make combat balanced when it's basically a complicated version of rock paper scissors. It'd be muuuuuuch better if it was like in starcraft where you could still have 3 different styles (like the zerg, protoss, or terran), but none of them have a distinct advantage over another. the grid system also really limits RS's combat capabilities.

Another perk of 99 summoning is not having to worry about picking up charms anymore. I just use xp lamps/rewards on the skills I find the least tolerable, ignoring xp/rates and such. For example, if I absolutely hate cooking I'll use XP boosts on cooking because that's less time spent doing something that I don't enjoy.

They made it sound like you're just gonna be screwed if your stats aren't very balanced. Defense is almost mandatory to survive apparently

"Yelps is also getting involved with this update, as he temporarily renames his home The Squeal of Neptune, giving you a chance to catch some brand-new cosmetic fish-themed attire!" lol no surprises there