JIM

I agree that randoms are fine as is now but didn't Jagex state that the higher the level, the less chance of a random event?

You owe it to them and yourself to let your feelings be known on the subject. Many people who are caught up in situations like yours find it hard to voice their concerns, or think that those concerns won't be taken seriously. Let them know what you're worrying about, don't sugar coat it and make sure that they listen. Don't let them drag you into their squabbles, if they do, let them know that it's not and shouldn't be your place to get involved in any arguments they may have. At the end of the day they both have an obligation to you whether they are together as a couple or not. If they haven't seemed to factor you into any of their decisions then it's up to you to be heard and make sure they're aware of the effect this is all having on you. I'm not saying that they won't already be aware that this is having an effect on you but they may not realise how much. I'm really sorry things have gone this way for you. I had a messy upbringing and I know how scared and confused it can make you feel at times. Take solace in the fact that if they do break up it's for the best, staying in an unhappy relationship can be far more damaging for all involved. Just remember that in situations like these, kids are usually the deciding factor. You have influence, use it well. Good luck, my thoughts are with you!

Great answer. Paul has always been a no nonsense, on-the-ball kinda guy. I for one would rather wait 2 years for an original, well thought out skill than a rushed cookiecutter. I'm glad that the RS dev team doesn't pander to the will of the masses, they make tough decisions for the good of RS. I love this Q&A stuff :D

I think that the billing is more than adequate as it is, especially when compared to some other MMORPGs I've played. I would like to see a 'pay for one month only' option though.

It's a bit late in the day for any of it to help you much. :) For me it has the potential to save quite alot of time!

I love the new random events. XP lamps every time and I can have a decent pee without fear of random deaths by chickens etc Not getting a Strange Plant every 2 and a half minutes at Bandits is good too. \o/

I hug all of my friends regardless of gender on a regular basis! I think it's important to show that you love someone, even if it is friendly man-love. If you don't fancy someone, it's not gay.

There is scientific evidence to back much of this up now, too! There's a study in particular that deals with the elasticity of the ligaments in black people which increases the effectiveness of certain physical actions, such as running, jumping etc I hate when stuff like this is written off as stereotyping. The world is a living, breathing example!

I made one 'off the cuff' sarcastic remark and you use it to justify a post full of regurgitated egotism? I would also put to you that your admittedly condescending tone does more to make you look 'smug' than anything I've done. You obviously know what you're talking about, I have spent most of this post trying to get something out of you that doesn't sound like you're plagarising a textbook, though. I'm not questioning any of your statements out of malice but merely in the interests of the discussion. I want to continue with this discussion but not if the tone continues, so if you could direct some of your pent up frustration at "most" of the people who "don't know what they're talking about", away from me, I would be grateful. Thanks. I'm not surprised.

I know he didn't. You were implying that he did though. In fact in my last post I dealt with that issue and concluded that it was an ideological standpoint. I take slight offense to your condescending tone - particularly the end of the quote. Do you always automatically assume intellectual superiority? :P My final sentence was somewhat sarcastic, implying that the average person won't know the difference. Again, I don't need schooling. Do you purposely choose the writing prose of someone who is teaching? I'd thought this would turn into a discussion, instead I feel like you're regurgitating information at me in a semi-patronising manner.

Believe me, I feel your pain! I live in a little town in Buckinghamshire ATM with a large Asian population. I'm not generalising by any means but I have noticed the race card being played an awful lot from that particular demographic. However, if you look at this from a higher perspective, you'll see that the race card, even if it is over-used, is generally used for a reason. The Muslim/Asian communities feel increasingly under fire from the media, the police force and the media-influenced populace. They are being demonised to a large extent and in that position, who can blame them for being a little defensive? As always, IMO education and empathy lead the way forward.

Centrally planned economies such as the US/Englands? :) We both have central banks that control interest rates, inflation etc... We're "Capitalist" tho, right? ;)

Dude, I know all of this. The issue in point was "Why do people hate communism?" though, and I was trying to address the issue that "Communism" in the modern sense isn't what Communism was envisioned to be. The widely shared view of Communism is that of regimes such as Stalin, but this is only because dictators such as he took what they wanted from Marxist theory and, like you said, left out huge portions. The point I was trying to construe is that when people say "Communism" nowadays, what they're really doing is using the term to describe the ideologies of a chosen few who used the theory as an excuse to control through force. Marx obviously didn't mean for anything he'd written to be used in the manner it was. Do you have any links/references showing that Stalin invented Communism?

If you don't mean it to be racist and you're not a racist, is it racist? :) The political correctness movement has harmed the race issue more than it's helped it, IMO.

This was my original point. It seems you're arguing semantics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism I don't disagree with anything you said in your previous post but I don't see the relevance to my previous comments. I don't need to be schooled on socio-economic theory, thanks. :) I would put forward the notion that whilst the "Communist" governments you speak of do use violent coercion to gain power and control, in doing so they aren't following any of the basic tenets of communist theory and so can't be deemed as "Communists" in the purest sense, only in the media-induced bastardisation of the word. You admit yourself the word has been bastardised but use the fact that so-called "Communist" governments don't follow Communism as proof that Communism doesn't exist? I'm debating the theory, not the word usage. Let's get past pedantic nitpicking and get to the good stuff please.

http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_ ... pics_study I found this study on my online travels and found it a really good read. I'm from a mix-raced family (my mums side of the family are black Jamaican and my fathers side are white English) and this study is interesting for me as I've seen this issue from both sides of the track. I think how we look at the issue of race and how we choose to go about defining ourselves as a species is more important now than it's ever been. There are 6.5billion people on the planet, the world is smaller than it's ever been with the advent and acceleration of new technologies and inter-racial mingling is increasing exponentially... ...if society as a whole doesn't get the bigger picture soon, we're all going to be hiding from the mushroom clouds before long.

I don't understand whether you're countering my point or offering an explanation... :) Stalinism is a Communist-Marxist theory but there are also some non-Marxist forms of Communism. Someone claiming to be a Communist but whom doesn't act as a Communist, isn't a Communist.

Something else I'd like to add (it won't let me edit my last post) is that somehow, through the public education system and the media, Communism has been linked with Facism on an almost subconscious level. People seem to find it very hard to distinguish between the two or tend to think they go hand in hand... Which of course they don't!

The West isn't even a fully capitalist society... Part of where all this "down with the Commies" rubbish comes from is government propaganda purposes during the Cold War. Create a demon for society to focus its hatred on and they'll also be less likely to sort out any problems they have at home. "Radical Islam" currently occupies the seat once held by Communism. It's just another shill, used by the government propaganda machine to keep us all in a state of fear and ignorance.

That's an attitude to aspire to. :)

So you absolutely slated my last post, calling it a cliche and whatnot... ...and then you post what is basically a mass email? Pot, kettle... black?

I agree with those who say that the given scenario would never happen and as such, is moot. I don't think torture should ever be permissible. Once you make it okay in one instance, it's a slippery slope... In an ideal world, if you could be 100% sure of a persons guilt and 100% sure that any information gathered would be both truthful and relevant then in the given scenario I think torture would be morally justifiable. None of the above could be verified to any reasonable degree though, and so there will always be a chance that the person being tortured is an innocent and is being wrongfully tortured. For that reason and that reason alone I will always be against the use of torture in any situation. Also, as someone else has already posted... Any information obtained through torture has to be seen as suspect information. How could anyone honestly accept a confession under torture? I find it absolutely ridiculous.

Just playing devils advocate: So it's just coincidence that violence pervades in the Muslim world? http://www.systemicpeace.org/PC2005.pdf Are definitions of Jihad all misinterpretations? It seems from some passages that the Qu'ran promotes violence. Is it just coincidence that suicide bombers follow the Quran? That Islamic terrorism is faith-based? http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52184 Even if Islam doesn't promote violence, it certainly seems to be used to justify it. Ignorance is bliss eh? Try taking a look outside. Violence is hardly contained to the muslim world. Islam doesn't promote violence any more than christianity does. It does advocate defense of their own however, what's wrong with that? Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Iraqi muslims lay dead in the streets of Iraq. The victims of Christian nations sent to their country for a lie. Don't you think a pre-emptive military strike (IE. The US vs. Iraq) promotes violence more than a few passages in the Qu'ran advocating defense and (as someone mentioned previously) battle tactics?

Um, the policies called, "The War on Drugs" is something proposed by the US, not some gang war battle about drugs (1). The most extreme drugs are the cause for concern with respect to these cartels, they barely even deal in marijuana. Legalizing marijuana is the first step, and you could even combine decriminalizing all other drugs with the legalization of marijuana. Decriminalization is really the only first step that I see towards making these cartels lose some of their power. We can go from there when we figure out how to truly stop them. I agree with you 100%. Criminalising drug use will never solve the 'problem'. Education is the way forward. Here's a link I think will interest you that is relevant, it deals with a conversation/interview between Bill Maher and Ron Paul... http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Ron_Paul_ ... _0221.html For those too lazy to check the link I'll post the parts I find most interesting...

Here is a website regarding the Electric Universe theory... http://www.kronia.com/electric.html And here's some more info, touching a bit on spin and supposed physical evidence thought to give credence to the theory... http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/ ... mbrero.htm