Danqazmlp

Moved to the Art Bazaar, the guys here should be willing and able to help you out :)

Just because a system is allowed to be used by a single person, it doesn't mean that it is it's only use. I can guarantee it will bring some new users into the game, and there are probably many which have already been used. If some users will abuse it, it doesn't mean that it has ultimately failed too. I'm not saying it is perfect, or that is couldn't be reworked to be better, as the exp boosts do seem excessive, but many comments seem to think that any referral system at all is selling out and a bad thing. Personally, I think a small starter kit consisting of extra gold, runes, items etc would be a much better way of going with it.

In my opinion, no, they shouldn't. You still committed a crime, so still actively went against the law, thus should be punished. It shouldn't matter if it's no longer illegal.

Both, but there's more negativity towards Jagex than the players. It's not like anyone was really going, "I'm not telling my friends about runescape because I don't get anything for it" That isn't the point though. People could have an endless number of reasons for not telling a friend about Runescape. It is perfectly logical to implement a referral system. Anybody thinking otherwise is basically deluded. It's another case of Jagex being a big business and needing to do everything they can to create new accounts. This isn't 2004 any more, they cannot sit back and do nothing letting straight word of mouth to carry the game. Runescapes bubble burst years ago and if Jagex don't do this sort of thing, even if the players will abuse it, Runescape will stagnate. The blame for any abuse or negativity should be laid squarely at the feet of the players who want to abuse the system. It is there to aid keeping the game afloat, but most don't see that and just care about their exp and other people's exp.

Great update from Jagex. People are complaining, but only about people abusing it. So who is actually to blame for it not being good, Jagex, or the players in the community who will abuse it? Almost every other online-centred game out there has some form of friend referral system, it was actually more odd that Jagex hadn't implemented one than that they have. In a perfect world it would be a perfect system, but the horrendous xp-only community around Runescape now will ruin it.

Sounds incredibly interesting. CS on a console would be a bit strange though, without the ability to react and move aim as quick.

This statement and the circles this thread is going in are exactly why the debate is annoying. Pro legalisation arguments like this are way too generalised and over simplified and ignore integral things which have been said many times, even in this thread. You are basically ignoring everything already said such as tobacco moving towards illegal status. It isn't hypocrisy, it's called the modern world moving towards getting rid of substances which have any chance of causing negative effects. The modern world cannot suddenly ban things which are engrained in world society, create millions of jobs and incredible amounts of money. It can however keep something banned when it does none of those.

Don't forget that tobacco is slowly being pushed into illegal status. At least in the EU and UK, in the last 20 years or so, it has been taken off TV screens, public and indoor places and has a very large stigma attached to it. I could very realistically see it being banned totally within the next 50 years. One of the major forces stopping it is actually that tobacco companies bring money into the economy which needs to be looked at.

I hate going into larger towns because I dislike the fact that any given moment there's several security cameras with me in their view like I'm some [bleep]ing criminal who is guilty until proven innocent. I feel deeply sorry for you with that mentality. Unless you are doing something wrong, a CCTV operator won't take a second look at you. The fact is that CCTV makes areas much safer and personally, I and much in favour of putting CCTV in as many public places as humanly possible. They make me feel much safer when walking anywhere, are a great deterrent to most crimes and if a crime is committed, they can aid greatly in finding the culprit. They are one of the greatest assets to policing in this country. I get constantly amazed at the paranoia of average internet users. The police, government and any other authorities do not care whatsoever about you, deal with it. You are nothing but tiny fish in the ocean. They don't care about your everyday actions, they aren't watching you, reading your emails and plotting to make a dictatorship at ever turn. The police and governments in the UK are humans, everyday people. We even have a police officer on Tip.it staff. He certainly isn't spending every day monitoring the forums just to catch you doing something wrong to have more power over you and throw you in jail.

It's the same reason you don't drink alcohol at work. Both impair your coordination and balance, delay your reaction time. Pot also hurts your short-term memory and distorts your perception. Exactly. In this case, it is much more closely related to drinking than smoking, due to it negatively effecting your actions. It can make you drowsy, effect coordination and generally reduce your ability to work at a competent standard which an employer wants. Just as it would not be legal at work, it would also be illegal to drive while under the influence, operate any heavy machinery and use it under certain ages.

There's a black market BECAUSE of prohibition. Have you even heard of Al Capone? Also, you're not a libertarian. There is also a large black market in tobacco and Alcohol currently, even though it is legal. You cannot tell me they are there because of phoibi... never mind. "dry" counties, age requirements. Crime over prohibited items shows that people are going to do what they want and punishing for them is a waste of resources for any society to spend on. I can't honestly believe you just said that. Basically you say enforcing the law is a waste of money. Lets just get rid of the police altogether? And as a matter of fact, a lot of the black market in alcohol and tobacco is actually due to people wanting to make money in organised crime. They aren't selling it to under-aged people or in countries where it is illegal, they are making it out of dangerous items, selling it cheap and counterfeit. The same would almost certainly happen were marijuana to become legal. But again, I cannot take seriously a comment which in essence seems to state that law enforcement is pointless.

Been playing this mod: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?board=189.0 It recreates 7th Century Britain and Ireland, with Saxon, Angles, Picts and Celts among various other peoples'. It makes major changes to the character creation, letting you even choose your height. It really does take the game to a time when it feels like you are in a very uncivilised landscape. Kind of hard to describe the full mod but it is very good, the best I have played.

It's not quite like that. The only way you'll get schizophrenia from it is if you already had the genetics for it. If you never had a predisposition for it, you can't get it. Marijuana justs brings it on a little earlier. The point being that quite a few people have the genetics for it (some NHS reports say as many as 1 in 5, though I'm sceptical of that). Alcohol and tobacco, though dangerous, don't have the same short term risk associated with them. It also brings it on significantly earlier, in some cases decades earlier. Okay. Shouldn't it be each person's choice to do it or not? Alcohol and tobacco and probably fast food are worse than cannabis, but they are legal. If you can be responsible with it, why should it not be your choice? No. Governments and law enforcers have the responsibility to look after the safety of it's citizens, from both internal dangers and external. The danger may be low, but it still has the possibility of danger. I can be responsible with a chainsaw but walking through a city centre with it will get me arrested. I accept that I don't have the choice because it is for the protection of civilians that the police enforce things.

It's not as black and white as you make it out to be. You can infringe on the speech rights of criminals and still want to promote speech rights in other areas. If you believe it to be all or nothing then that is your opinion, but many people, including me are able to make the distinction between different situations and different people.

I don't think there is enough reason to remove it. It has enough activity to be there, even limited as it is.

Then you have not bothered looking. A quick Google search can show you it is a growing problem in many countries such as China and South American countries. Just because you have not heard about certain criminality does not mean it is not there and is not of concern, it just means that it is not publicised enough in your area or in the media you navigate. It may not be as rampant, but that is because people can get both legally. This however doesn't mean that legality stops the criminality surrounding it, much like it would not stop much of the criminality around legalised Marijuana.

First let me say it is not the government wanting this control, it is the police. Two separate entities. I can see where you are coming from roccodog, but law is not black and white. The various groups which laws have to go through would not allow police total control of a persons communication. The details would be changed and churned in all the discussions, ending up somewhere along the lines of the current policies on phone tapping which is needing warrants on the more severe invasions of privacy.

There's a black market BECAUSE of prohibition. Have you even heard of Al Capone? Also, you're not a libertarian. There is also a large black market in tobacco and Alcohol currently, even though it is legal. You cannot tell me they are there because of phoibi... never mind. Really? Maybe in Appalachia and Tennessee for grain alcohol and moonshine (things that are illegal in many surrounding areas). But people aren't killing each other over it because there is little demand for it. Seriously, where is this black market for alcohol and tobacco. If you don't know about a subject, don't try to argue about it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10138617 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8285307.stm http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14375153 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-13875455 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-13792224 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12456360 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-12051029 That was simply from a single search of the BBc news website under 'fake alcohol', taking the top results. The black market for tobacco and Alcohol is huge, leading to many deaths and injuries. Can you give proof that would not happen if marijuana was to be legal?

I don't understand how you can't enforce laws without violating rights. Try it. Think of any situation where you arrest somebody without infringing some sort of right. Holding them in a cell, restricting their movement and who they speak to.

This isn't America, there are no amendments to constitutions. British law works in a much more flexible way without being hampered by something written many years ago. The fact of the matter is that the police NEED these abilities to protect innocent civilians. It is their responsibility to do what is needed. Hampering them just because some people who are planning to cause harm claim they want free speech is something which needs changing.

There's a black market BECAUSE of prohibition. Have you even heard of Al Capone? Also, you're not a libertarian. There is also a large black market in tobacco and Alcohol currently, even though it is legal. You cannot tell me they are there because of phoibi... never mind.

Where this coming from? I'll tell you where: Made up land. All they have said is looking to put measures in place to block accounts where the account is being used for criminal purposes. We have 0 details other than that and its just pessimistic "erosion of free speech" hog wash to suggest that we can categorically say it'll by pass any sort of safeguard or including unjustified monitoring. Heck its not like ALLLLLL these things arent monitored already anyway by the parent companys Police or government agencies blocking accounts that they believe are being used for criminal purposes is invasion of privacy and infringes on free speech. That is a basic fact. Of course parent companies monitor messages and the like (and in all likelihood, police too), but taking any action against it is unlawful without a wiretap/search warrant. The argument isn't what you stated as fact (although I wouldn't call blocking an account as an invasion of privacy), but how far should free speech stretch? Do those who are out to do nothing but cause harm to the public and their property deserve as much free speech as innocent civilians? Where do we set the bar for who gets certain rights and how far they go? Should not the mass opinion of the public do so like what seems to be happening, or should the minority? It may be fickle to say this, but if you do nothing wrong, your free speech, your rights do not get effected. Even in the off chance a mistake is made, the British courts and police can swiftly counteract anything done.

This completely aligns with my views on the matter. Slippery slopes are just an annoying argument to use because it stops people doing anything at all. As long as the government could come up with a good way to put it through with restrictions in place, it could work wonders. Comparisons to the American constitutions are pointless to make because unlike in America, our laws have the ability to ebb and flow, change in accordance to the country and it's will. We aren't restricted to policies supported by a minority just because they have the backing of an out of date piece of legislation. When what seems like the majority of a country supports something, even if to others outside said country it seems odd to them, it has the possibility of being passed. True democracy.

Congratulations on getting through the training regime.

The epic bump wasn't needed but I have saved this for when the opportunity arose: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-pro-marijuana-arguments-that-arent-helping/ 5 arguments that don't help: