chris1216

Just got back. 1) absolutely amazing 2) incredible suspense 3) incredibly well-made fight scenes 4) incredible go see it.

1) If it's being considered hypothetically, you assume that it is feasible and don't say anything as blatantly obvious as "it won't work" 2) you're blathering on and on about advantages as if runescape was a competitive game.

1) I said, don't post about this being feasible, because we all know it's not, and you don't sound any smarter by pointing out the blatantly obvious 2) How exactly would the ladder ruin accomplishments? It would be a separate set of servers and characters, you don't lose your original account.

Nope, its from Nighthawk by Edward Hopper, currently located in the Art Institute in Chicago. And considering the first one is drawn by hand while the second one was done in MS Paint, they're not really comparable.

The above quote is yet another sign of the apocalypse. Someone actually complained about getting more bank space. This update couldn't have come at a better time for me- I just filled up my bank and was trying to find ways to organize and make room. Then again, the update just helps me procrastinate till hunting comes out :lol:

Disclaimers: 1) This is purely a fun and hypothetical discussion 2) DON'T POST ABOUT IT NOT BEING FEASIBLE- that's not the point of the thread 3) This isn't a suggestion- it's extremely unfeasible and never will happen. Background: Back when the RS2 Beta was released, members had plenty of (temporary) fun testing the new engine while also enjoying a clean slate- everyone started with the exact same stats and items. No rares, no high leveled players, just everyone on an even playing field. Idea: A completely separate Runescape. Everyone can re-register their character and start as fresh newbies right off tutorial island. How much fun would that be? The completely different economy, all the races to do the quests and be the best in different skills, no ability to "buy" your way to a 99. Personally, I would get a kick out of playing it.

Voting Yes means you are for the removal to a certain point of AA. Voting No means you are against the removal of AA. To a certain point? That's crap and you know it. Voting Yes ends affirmative action. PERIOD.

you do realize, adam, that affirmative action sets the precedent for destroying Title IX? More later after i eat dinner

But why do you hate it? Making up for all those years of those people being oppressed? It's unfair, we had a discussion on it. It's not right to judge people based on race or sex. It should be based on your intelligence, your work ethic, etc... And as far as making up for all those years. I'm not to blaim for slavery, I wasn't personally there. My ancestors came to America slightly after WWII from Germany. I live in the north, segregation wasn't huge there. Why blaim all white people for the mistakes of their ancestors. Blaim the responsables ancestors, or blaim the ones alive that were there and did something. I hate when people use that arguement! It's reverse discrimination. I hate when people like you make it all about YOU, as if affirmative action ever blamed anyone for anything. No one ever said this was someone's fault, you did.

What apparently happened is that some people might not have read too closely, seeing as how the proposal calls itself the "Michigan Civil Rights Initiative", making it sound like it's actually progress in civil rights. I'd call that misleading, but what do i know? At my college, a group calling itself the "Young Americans for Freedom" tried to sponsor "catch an illegal immigrant day".

You are correct, proposal 2 demolished affirmative action.

It's definitely extremely touchy and complicated.

1) I'm asian, and I definitely thought it sucked that I didn't get the extra 20pts on my application at the University of Michigan. 2) The whole "they'll be looked down on" thing just means that it won't be easy- but since was racial progress ever easy? affirmative action gives a boost to a group of people, and the fact that it doesn't give a boost to everyone that needs it doesn't mean it should be axed. Saying that is like saying curing hepatitis C is bad because it doesn't cure Hepatitis B. And actually, the average asian household income is significantly higher than that of any other race.

Because that would only apply to things like university admissions, not things like employment (since the person you're hiring is unemployed and thus has no income anyways). Not to mention that discrimination in the workplace still exists despite its illegality, and affirmative action helps counter that.

You are correct that it's because of economic status, pro, but i'd rather have affirmative action because 1) Since a majority of those living near, at or below the poverty line are minorities, affirmative action affects MOST of them 2) It's definitely MUCH better than nothing

1) You're amazingly pathetic if the only reason you were arguing with me about something like this is because you wanted to win 2) Yep, still baseless 3) Oh yeah, arguing to win....congratulations. You're just so amazing.

You clearly didn't understand my ironic statement about the constitution, and your baseless argument about the playing field being level are answered above.

Affirmative Action: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_Action Proposal 2: http://www.oneunitedmichigan.org/pdf/ap ... nguage.pdf

Bufoman's arguments: 1) Affirmative action is Unconstitutional 2) People should hire whoever they please 1) Like i said above, all comparisons to a document that AFFIRMED the slave trade are ironic and moot 2) People hired whoever they pleased in the 1950s. And saying that we should respect what the majority says justifies 1) The war in Iraq 2) The Patriot Act 3) The invasion of Afghanistan 4) Segregation 5) Counting a slave as 3/5ths of a person

I'd consider all discussions of affirmative action's constitutionality a moot point considering the Constitution was written when slavery was legal. We the people, except blacks....... Before i start into everyone that disagreed with me, I would like to point out that I agree that race doesn't exist as a biolgical distinction, but as a social construct. It's there, it'll probably never go away, get used to it. Additionally, I would like to point out a key statistic from Michigans exit polls: A massive percentage (60%+) of voters who said their families were getting ahead economically said they were voting FOR Proposal 2, and a massive percentage (60%+) of those who said they were getting behind economically said they were voting AGAINST proposal 2. This post addresses the 2 key arguments behind "affirmative action bad". They say: 1) Affirmative action gives an unfair advantage to minorities or 2) Affirmative action is good, but outdated and thusly useless. 1) An argument that affirmative action gives minorities an unfair advantage assumes that all races are currently on an even playing field. That assumption is of course, complete and utter BS. For example, I will compare blacks and whites. From CNN in 2003: From a study done by Cornell University: 2) The argument that affirmative action is outdated is also of course based on the previous assumption, that minorities are somehow on an even footing with white americans. That is also complete BS, because it assumes a lack of racism in multiple levels of American society. The whole argument that "no one discriminates based on race anymore because its illegal" is so wrong it makes my blood boil. Here is a thought: Do you actually think that a white employer, given a chance between a potential black employee and a white employee, with the EXACT same credentials, will employ each of the 50% of the time, all the time? Some of the responses on this thread are making me legitimately angry.

That is something I can agree with. I've chosen a pass for my main RS account that is so incomprehensible by other people that my account is never worth trying to attack. Also, I'm only F2P, so there's nothing in there worth getting to. :lol: ... BTW, Fook-a-ji, you need to fix your thread title. I don't know who noticed it was misleading, I know I didn't report it, but I would fix it before something worse happens if I were you. :o :? ... ~Mr. Devnull Devnull, I have some links for you http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=de ... gle+Search http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... tnG=Search

Devnull, your existence in general f2p makes my brain hurt. You all that are whining and complaining about the OoC and their newbie appreciation day seem to have a severe problem separating Real Life and a GAME. Who the hell are you to judge if they want to give some free items? Does a set of iron armor ruin your gaming experience? You're acting like Runescape is a competition, where if you didn't get any help and had to learn on your own, that means they have to do the same thing too. Unfair? Have some cheese with your whine. Get over it. Everyone learns eventually. Just because some newer players get a boost doesn't somehow ruin it. Any equally [developmentally delayed]ed arguments that this teaches them to beg is also stupid. If they were going to be beggars, they'd do it regardless of the OoC. And if they get a little help that makes them appreciative and nicer, I'm all for it. Quit taking this stuff so seriously.

Proposal 2 has passed, with a large margin to boot. http://www.oneunitedmichigan.org Yes, measures like this have passed before in 2 other states, but here in Michigan, we like to do things with even more ignorant insanity than your lousy state. Congrats to all those that supported and voted for proposal 2- diversity is overrated anyways.

1 less ess for all that time saved? you do realize that the extra time means you can probably craft more in the long run. hellbellz that post made my head hurt with the complete lack of logic.

Do some researchs before acting stupid :? . Almost every game has a free to play version, and i know of one ( Puzzle Pirates) which offer a totally free way to play their paying version (doublon system, play it to know what it is). I was saying that Runescape is the only MMORPG that has this many users (can't remember the number, but at least 800k members and god knows how many f2p) that offers a free to play version. Puzzle pirates is small and has a trial that expires after a certain number of playing days. Can you name some other game that has a couple hundred thousand players and a completely free version? You also didn't explain why its a good move to give ANYTHING to f2p.