Sly_Wizard

110 and 111 are actually fine for me. 112 always has been the laggiest out of any server in the game. Don't know why, though.

I saw a 99 earlier. Should have gotten the pic :'(

Nope no destroy option, when you've got the robes from closet does it says its empty ? I didn't check that >.< If there's no destroy option then I don't see what's stopping you from getting a pair of robes, dropping them, getting another pair from the closet before the old robes disappear and repeating to your heart's content. If it works you could make a buttload of money fairly quickly :thumbsup: They don't respawn. Well, I was working on the assumption that they were a quest item :P

Nope no destroy option, when you've got the robes from closet does it says its empty ? I didn't check that >.< If there's no destroy option then I don't see what's stopping you from getting a pair of robes, dropping them, getting another pair from the closet before the old robes disappear and repeating to your heart's content. If it works you could make a buttload of money fairly quickly :thumbsup:

Do they have a destroy option? If not, then why not use the same method by which people have multiple Knight's Swords/Carnellian armors?

I didn't laugh. And some of what he said was/is true.

I'm not so sure about that. In Florida, at least, if you do the IB program in high school and pass the test at the end, you are GUARANTEED admission into any, non-private state university.

All I can say to you is good luck.

Don't have one. I'm a bit wary of quests which give attack/strength experience 8-) And, to whomever said it takes longer to do quests than to get a skill cape, I seriously beg to differ.

Guess again :lol: its more easier to stay in bank and use some logs to kinfe.. And I don't doubt it is, which is why a fletching cape isn't that much of an accomplishment, either. Smithing, herblore, slayer, runecrafting, summoning and construction are probably the better skill capes, recognition wise.

Guess again :lol:

Alot of skills take 'no skill', just alot of time, patience and grinding. So, by your definition, runecrafting cape is a noob cape? Most of it is running around to and fro. The input required for a runecrafting cape (Time and money) far exceeds that of a quest cape.

Errr... Not if claws costs 16M+.

...It's still a noob cape. Quests take no skill, especially since a large part of quests is running around Runescape playing delivery boy/girl with the odd battle thrown in here and there. Edit: And the highest level you need for a quest is like 75, right? That's like 1/12th the experience of 99, iirc.

I really don't care how sucky they are. I just want a pair.

This post is full of contradictions. Either you understand why God does what he does, meaning you rival God is both wisdom and understanding, or you don't, in which case you can offer no value judgment concerns His actions as you're speaking of things you don't know nor understand. Know what you know, but admit to knowing what you don't know.

Did I tell you how much I like you?

You're my new favorite person 8-)

I never said you did. I did say, however, that you have to explain how gay people are being discriminated against moreso than any other group also barred from marrying under the fact that marriage is defined as "one man and one woman". And, yes, I'm still waiting.

Hooray for not understand what a red herring. A red herring is an attempt to divert attention away from a specific topic onto another topic (First A. Introduce B. A is abandoned). But, here, I'll kindly post the progression of the argument. Noob says people are singling gays out by not allowing them to marry. I said that they aren't because, by virtue of the "one man, one woman" clause (And not a "No gay people shall be barred from marrying" clause), all groups consisting of anything other than one man and one woman are barred from marrying. You turn up and scream "Red harring!". Find the red herring, please. This should be interesting. Yes, it is. This leads me to believe that you've not been keeping up and just decided to read one post and respond with "Red herring!" Once again, the false claim was made that gays are being singled out. My post clearly showed how that is patently false. They are not being singled out any more than any other group prevented from marrying due to the "one man, one woman" clause. Try to answer that, next time. Not really, but hey. If that's what you believe then more power to you. The biggest misconception about arranged marriages is that the intended parties HAD to go through with them when, in fact, this is not true. Iirc, they weren't required but if one party didn't go through with it there were heavy reparations (Of which I can't remember atm). ...Speaking of which, arranged marriages have a ridiculously low divorce rate :thumbup: ...And pederasty was once considered liberating. What's your point? That's great for Israel? And who mentioned incest? lol ...Still haven't gotten the point, huh? Since marriage is defined as being between "one man and one man" then by extension anyone who would want to marry their pet is also barred from marrying. But you seemingly haven't been able to understand. Either that or you're just being obtuse. Case reopened. You need to show why keeping marriage defined as being between "one man and one woman" is more discriminatory to people wanting to marry other people of their same gender than it is to people wanting to marry more than one persons of either their same or opposites genders or more discriminatory than to people wanting to marry non-humans. No, you haven't addressed anything. All you managed to do was ignore my original response that no one is singling gays out by keeping marriage to "one man and one woman", as other groups besides just gay people are negatively affected by it as well. But you effectively managed to avoid the point contained therein by promptly exclaiming "But those are different!".

Okay. So, in other words, you completely ignored what I wrote out and instead choose to resort back to the untrue statement of "We're discriminating against people with genetic differences"? No matter how many times you continue to use this statement it doesn't become anymore true. You continue to falsely assume that gays are being singled out, when this is patently false. No one group is being singled out, as we're "discriminating" on the basis that any marriage which wants to include any other parties other than one man and one woman to be invalid. Really, it's nowhere near as hard as you're making it out to be. As I've said way earlier in this thread, people are allowed to vote their convictions (Unless you live in a communist state). However, voting to retain marriage as being defined as one man and one woman is not singling out any one group of people, since it encompasses a vast majority of groups. African*. And, furthermore, I'm getting deathly sick of the entire "Race = Orientation" argument. Therefore, let's get a couple of things straight. 1.) Gays aren't actively separated from society except for by their own doing. They're not required to attend separate schools nor are they required to eat at different ends of a restaurant nor to ride in the back of the bus nor are denied any basic rights afforded to any other citizen. The only thing they are not afforded is the "right to marry" which, in itself, isn't even a right. It's a privilege bestowed by the government to certain groups of people. Yes, I can see how gays being disallowed to marry is equal to blacks being denied virtually all of their rights. Really. I can. (No, I really can't. The comparison is absurd.) 2.) Didn't I already explain this? Anti-miscegenation laws were deemed wrong because they denied one set of men and women the same privileges afforded another set of men and women. As no man nor woman has the ability to marry a man or a woman, respectively, they are not being denied any privileges that another group has as no group has them. This is the reason why anti-miscegenation laws were struck down in Loving v. Virginia. It's not that hard to understand. Every ban on gay marriage, at least in the U.S., has been voter approved :)

I didn't say that things are done for no reason, since things done for no reason at all wouldn't be done in the first place.

Normally, I wouldn't answer a question with a question but this time I am. Why should anything be illegal? The answer is that nothing should be illegal, but things are illegal because society deems that they be that way. Yes, it's that simple. ...And it worries me how people misuse the word "right".

Nice way to evade the question. I'll help you out, by restricting marriage to one man and one woman we're "discriminating" against: 1.) A man who wants to marry more than one woman. 2.) A woman who wants to marry more than one man. 3.) A man who wants to marry more than one man. 4.) A woman who wants to marry more than one woman. 5.) A man who wants to marry his car. 6.) A woman who wants to marry her car. 7.) A man who wants to marry his dog. 8.) A woman who wants to marry her dog. Etc. The list goes on and on and on. In other words, no, gay people are not being singled out by the law. They just happen to be one group of people restricted under it. Stop acting as if people are out to get the gays. /winnage I don't see why any of those should be illegal...? That's great for you that you don't think any of those should be illegal, but the point was that by allowing gays not to marry we're not singling them out any more than we're singling out a person belonging to any other group which is not "one man and one woman".

Nice way to evade the question. I'll help you out, by restricting marriage to one man and one woman we're "discriminating" against: 1.) A man who wants to marry more than one woman. 2.) A woman who wants to marry more than one man. 3.) A man who wants to marry more than one man. 4.) A woman who wants to marry more than one woman. 5.) A man who wants to marry his car. 6.) A woman who wants to marry her car. 7.) A man who wants to marry his dog. 8.) A woman who wants to marry her dog. Etc. The list goes on and on and on. In other words, no, gay people are not being singled out by the law. They just happen to be one group of people restricted under it. Stop acting as if people are out to get the gays. /winnage