Blyaunte

To be honest -- these images remind me of a Hot Wheels computer game my boys used to play a long time ago -- or those episodes from Looney Toons like "Duck Amuck", wherein the setting is one where we've pierced the Fourth wall. In any event, it looks fun and I, for one, am looking forward to them. :-D

"... sheep punching activity ..." :unsure: Am I the only person to see a double-entendre in that turn of phrase? I wonder if the activity gives a pair of rubber boots as a reward? :unsure: :lol:

Tries hard not to giggle ... *giggles* Damnit! :lol:

Ya know what -- I am gonna follow the advice I've already been given and just ignore you and your silly arguments any further. It goes nowhere. You keep repeating the same (already completely refuted) points as though no one's answered them. You ignore everything presented to you. It's not worth my time responding to you. I'll let someone else waste their time on you. :rolleyes:

Well I, for one, am looking forward to the wrap around text featrure ... :thumbsup:

LOL! ~ Mark Twain Like I said -- you can make statistics appear to mean "anything" -- a point which you deliberately ignored obviously missed. Inasumch as NO ONE knows exactly how many Runescape accounts are out there: how many Runescape accounts are solely operated; how many Runescape accounts are simply bots; how many accounts are all operated by the same individual; how many are simply inactive -- there really is no way of knowing how many actual accounts are involved in your "magical" equations statistics. Still -- I do find it amusing to see you so desperate to prove your point. As someone who has only recently joined this fansite, you seem to be working awfully hard to try and derail these discussions -- most characteristically through misplaced "facts", comments which are blatantly untrue, repetitive and provide little more than a great deal of denial and obfuscation.

Omission is betrayal, isn't it? I was in a similar situation a few months ago. I was dating a girl that was conservative christian. I'm atheist. It did cause problems after a while because she kept asking me to go to church with her and sooner or later you start running out of excuses why you can't go with her. Better get it out in the open now, before things get serious and unnecessary heartbreak is caused. I agree that you should make known your religious beliefs right off the bat. Because it could definitely be problematic in the future. If a serious relationship evolves, religious beliefs (or lack thereof) are bound to play a huge role. For me, I don't think I could ever marry an atheist, not because I don't like atheists. Just because so many problems would come up (private or public school, going to mass as a family, teaching kids how to say prayer, differences in how to raise a family, etc). Nor would I want someone to pretend to not care about it, because that puts them in a difficult position where they're weighing you and their own beliefs. I'm quoting this here because it serves as a better platform to discuss the issues of inter-religious marriages. I don't personally see an issue with most of it - religious beliefs are not mandatory to be a good (moral) person, to live a good life, to love and be loved. Why would the idea of dating an atheist put you off? You may even find yourself in a position where you could persuade an atheist to follow Christian teachings - to me, that would feel like an accomplishment. This isn't to say that you should force it into the relationship, but I know that I wouldn't personally put that as an obstacle. Being open to new ideas is still rather important in today's society, why shouldn't we be accepting of people with different religious beliefs? I guess it's a little different in America though, given that a vast majority believe in some kind of deity as opposed to not. I am reminded of the joke by Woody Allen: "My last relationship didn't work out. I'm an agnostic and she's an atheist and we couldn't agree on what religion *not* to bring our children up in ..." :lol:

I haven't read through all six pages -- but has anyone else mentioned yet, that this looks, strangely, like some kind of "anti-bot" random event thingy for agility bots? :rolleyes: Nothing they won't solve in a week. Oh - I've no doubts about that -- but it'll be interesting to see if Jagex does anthing with those bots ... :rolleyes:

Clearly you missed the "qualifier" -- enough "brain cells AND the ability to manipulate the game environment ..." :rolleyes: The point is, picking out botters is clearly simple enough and can be done rather easily. Make a slight alteration one day, amend it, add another another day. It'd be easy to pick out botters anywhere. Sure, they "adjust" then you simply make another minor change and grab the next batch. It may be inefficient, sure, but it's very very easy to pick out a bot. One doesn't need to simply ignore commentary -- which, by the way, as has already been pointed out to you, in this very thread, three times, you'd realize that Jmods and Pmods comments show up in your public chat, even if you have it turned off. Oh and JSYK, Jagex has, at least a half dozen times to my reckoning, made a small unannounced modifications to the game: wilderness wall, locking the door in Aubury's house, the force shield at the rope at LRC -- each time catching thousands of bots. it's what Jagex is doing with them, or failing to do with them, once they catch them, that is the problem. Oh and with respect to your "vocal minority" theory it's cute. Really. Very cute. If one was willing to accept your attempt to make the people on this singular fansite want to appear like it's only a fractional representation of a small minority of the players within the game then, yeah, sure, you can diddle with numbers and make it appear to mean anything. Fact is take a sampling of people from this site and compare the numbers here to any "poll" made on the main site, and you get the same effect: from voting for the return of the Wilderness to "what colours should abyssal whips be made?" the numbers jibe, time and again. The community is annoyed with bots. Had it up to their armpits with bots. We're not the "silent minority" you want to pretend us to be.

Ya know - you bring this same silly point up in every post you make. We're already told you, repeatedly, how it is easy to identify bots -- and you always gloss over it and ignore it. Is it that you think if you keep saying the above statement, over and over again, with enough conviction, it will eventually become the truth? So -- for the sake of making it abundantly clear to you, once more: BOTS ARE EASILY IDENTIFIED BY ANYONE WITH ENOUGH BRAIN CELLS AND THE ABILITY TO MANIPULATE THE GAME ENVIRONMENT (like a Jmod). ALL IT TAKES IS A MINOR ADJUSTMENT ALONG THE PATHWAY OF TYPICAL BOT, DEPLOYED SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT NOTICE, AND THE BOTS WILL ALL STICK OUT LIKE SORE THUMBS. Case in point -- in the earlier days of bots -- right after they introduced the Wildy wall, they literally caught THOUSANDS of runecrafting bots who, for whatever reason, could not navigate a section of the wall on their way to the abyss. Real players doing the same event COULD adjust for the change in the wall -- the bots couldn't. Real players came to the spot, got stuck for a second and then worked their way around it. Bots got stuck and then wandered back and forth for hours. HOURS!!!! DID YOU READ THAT? THEY GOT STUCK FOR HOURS!!!! BAM! Instant spotting for botting ... :rolleyes: Likewise, I'm not sure where you get this idea that people who dislike bots -- those that want the bots banned -- are in the "minority". Again -- it seems to me that this is just another one of these things you like to repeat, without evidence to support another of your baseless claims. Where in any of THAT did I call YOU a name? :unsure:

Ya know - you bring this same silly point up in every post you make. We're already told you, repeatedly, how it is easy to identify bots -- and you always gloss over it and ignore it. Is it that you think if you keep saying the above statement, over and over again, with enough conviction, it will eventually become the truth? So -- for the sake of making it abundantly clear to you, once more: BOTS ARE EASILY IDENTIFIED BY ANYONE WITH ENOUGH BRAIN CELLS AND THE ABILITY TO MANIPULATE THE GAME ENVIRONMENT (like a Jmod). ALL IT TAKES IS A MINOR ADJUSTMENT ALONG THE PATHWAY OF TYPICAL BOT, DEPLOYED SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT NOTICE, AND THE BOTS WILL ALL STICK OUT LIKE SORE THUMBS. Case in point -- in the earlier days of bots -- right after they introduced the Wildy wall, they literally caught THOUSANDS of runecrafting bots who, for whatever reason, could not navigate a section of the wall on their way to the abyss. Real players doing the same event COULD adjust for the change in the wall -- the bots couldn't. Real players came to the spot, got stuck for a second and then worked their way around it. Bots got stuck and then wandered back and forth for hours. HOURS!!!! DID YOU READ THAT? THEY GOT STUCK FOR HOURS!!!! BAM! Instant spotting for botting ... :rolleyes: Likewise, I'm not sure where you get this idea that people who dislike bots -- those that want the bots banned -- are in the "minority". Again -- it seems to me that this is just another one of these things you like to repeat, without evidence to support another of your baseless claims.

I haven't read through all six pages -- but has anyone else mentioned yet, that this looks, strangely, like some kind of "anti-bot" random event thingy for agility bots? :rolleyes:

Hee hee -- "tomato tomato" as the song goes ... ... and yes it is easy to criticize the man for not doing enough, while questioning his motives for doing what he's done so far -- but he is sitting in a very awkward spot between fundamentalists who won't accept change and a growing populace who are demanding it ... in some ways, you know, you almost have to feel a little sorry for the Wahabbi. I mean, yes they're basically Neanderthals -- and like the Neanderthals they're standing on the brink of an evolution that they don't want and aren't able to grasp and, likewise, may be unable to stop ... or not. Okay - Sympathy for the Devil, anyone? :rolleyes:

Do the ends justify the means? :unsure: I dunno -- I'd want to weigh that first, and see what comes of it.

No -- we're merely splitting hairs now -- all I am trying to ascertain here is that everyone understands that the source of the law in question, it's enforcement and punitive functions are all religious-based, as opposed to secular. Noxxx was taking a beating when he said, in a nutshell, that whatever happens in Saudi stays in Saudi, and was being chastised for it because of the entire "law rules over morality/god" issue. Keep in mind that, while I may not agree with either the source or the rules as they are enforced in Saudi, I sure as hell wouldn't go over there and attempt to assert my "rights as a Western woman" while visiting there -- and I agree with Noxxx that, as deplorable as these laws may seem to Western sensibilities, one has to acknowledge that a country has whatever authority it deems necessary to punish its population in whatever way it deems appropriate -- not matter how disgusting we may find it -- until such time as that said same population rises up and makes those buggers' eyes water ... We're slowly seeing reform in Saudi now -- painstaking and slow as it is -- but the cause of this is two-fold: one being the courage of those people to challenge the (religious and secular) authorities to demand the base rights enjoyed by other human beings around the globe; and the other being the fear that the said authorities have that, should they not acquiesce to said demands, they will be the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes. :rolleyes:

King Abdullah is scared -- and rightfully so -- as he currently operates one of the most oppressive regimes in the region where the disparity between rich and poor is probably amongst the widest in the world. Coincidentally, since the advent of the Arab Spring, Abdullah has laid down a whole slew of new "programs" aimed at buying off the revolution within his own country, including new unemployment benefits, subsidies for education, subsidies for housing and he's relaxed some efforts on the media -- including the internet. The recent effort to offer women the right to vote in the 2015 municipal elections is another such measure. :rolleyes:

Secular law enforcement is complicit, yes. Often, when the CPVPV make arrests, they do so with the assistance of the secular authorities. That said, these women being arrested and tried for driving vehicles are arrested and tried for committing acts of indecency, not for crimes and misdemeanors committed against the secular criminal code. Their trials are conducted before clerics and their punishments are meted out under the terms of Sharia, not civil, law. ... and keep in mind, that is only one such scenario. The CPVPV has a whole plethora of religious laws that they are authorized to enforce -- everything from "women driving" to dress code, restaurant (food handling and diet restrictions) administration, women smoking in public and (*gasp*) keeping men and women who are not married from fraternization! (Egads!) While they may use secular policing to give them added muscle, the rules under which they persecute are based entirely upon religious edicts, not secular laws of any kind. Let's not forget either that this is the same CPVPV that was responsible for the "ruling" of the Mecca Girls' School Fire fiasco in 2002 -- when they would not allow the girls to leave the burning building, and further hampered rescue efforts, because the girls weren't wearing proper Islamic dress and, subsequently, fourteen girls died in the fire. These [bleep]ers are strict! Saudi king overturns verdict against woman driver ... and King Abdullah buys off another day without a revolution ... :unsure:

For those of you so inclined: Order of the Stick Looking for Group :thumbsup:

... and that is where you're wrong again. After Manal al-Sharif, the woman in question, posted the video of herself driving a car in Khobar, she was arrested by individuals from the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. The Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice ("CPVPV") [formerly known as "the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Elimination of Sin"] -- are mutaween -- clerics posing as policemen who enforce Sharia Law. I'm talking about the country law, not the sharia law. Of course, the two are quite tightly bound together.. ... and I am telling you that she was arrested and tried because she was "sinning" -- not on criminal or misdemeanor charges ... :rolleyes: Then why do most other countries run under the Sharia law not do the same? Why is driving legal there? Read back -- your answer is there. To summarize: Saudi owes it's very existence, mainly, to Abdul-Aziz bin Saud's alliance with the Wahhabi. The Wahhabi were/are ultra-conservative fundamentalist extremists who wish to purge Islam of all "impurities" -- which includes ANYTHING that is considered to be -- by their own definition mind you -- contrary to Qu'ranic tenet and Sharia law. Most other countries operating under Sharia Law don't have this as the basis of their society -- although Afghanistan likewise had a Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice under the Taliban, and so does, I think, the Gaza Strip under Hamas. Oh that make's sense then. Probably the same reason other Middle-Eastern countries allow the distribution of alcohol and pork, etc. Precisely -- Saudi is an EXTREMELY strict Islamist country, and the reason why is because of the Wahhabi and their influence. Then again, if not for them, there'd've been no Saudi Arabia. So meh ... :unsure: In any event, point is, the law in question that was being discussed is a religious law not a secular law. It is enforced by religious police, tried before religious clerics and the punishment is determined under religious edict.

Honestly -- Phaneuf's got to stop poaching for guys with their heads down at the opposition blue line, like that, anyways -- he gets burned on it at least two to three times a game, and gives up way too many odd-man rushes coming the other way ... He's a grown up now -- Team Captain and all -- he shouldn't be fricken head-hunting at the blue line anyways -- and he needs to get his ass back to the defensive zone and play defense.

... and that is where you're wrong again. After Manal al-Sharif, the woman in question, posted the video of herself driving a car in Khobar, she was arrested by individuals from the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. The Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice ("CPVPV") [formerly known as "the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Elimination of Sin"] -- are mutaween -- clerics posing as policemen who enforce Sharia Law. I'm talking about the country law, not the sharia law. Of course, the two are quite tightly bound together.. ... and I am telling you that she was arrested and tried because she was "sinning" -- not on criminal or misdemeanor charges ... :rolleyes: Then why do most other countries run under the Sharia law not do the same? Why is driving legal there? Read back -- your answer is there. To summarize: Saudi owes it's very existence, mainly, to Abdul-Aziz bin Saud's alliance with the Wahhabi. The Wahhabi were/are ultra-conservative fundamentalist extremists who wish to purge Islam of all "impurities" -- which includes ANYTHING that is considered to be -- by their own definition mind you -- contrary to Qu'ranic tenet and Sharia law. Most other countries operating under Sharia Law don't have this as the basis of their society -- although Afghanistan likewise had a Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice under the Taliban, and so does, I think, the Gaza Strip under Hamas.

We shall see what we shall see. There's two contributing factors here: 1. This is pre-season -- so you got a lot of guys humping ass to try and make the team, which means a lot of over-zealous under-achievers out there pushing the envelope to get noticed -- which results in a lot of unnecessary rough play. 2. I suspect that this is going to be a lot like the obstruction rule changes several years ago -- you're going to see a lot of these calls early in the season as officials get used to making the calls and players get used to not committing the infractions. It will settle down before Christmas. Until THEN, yes. Shanny's gonna be a busy boy. :unsure:

... and that is where you're wrong again. After Manal al-Sharif, the woman in question, posted the video of herself driving a car in Khobar, she was arrested by individuals from the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. The Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice ("CPVPV") [formerly known as "the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Elimination of Sin"] -- are mutaween -- clerics posing as policemen who enforce Sharia Law. I'm talking about the country law, not the sharia law. Of course, the two are quite tightly bound together.. ... and I am telling you that she was arrested and tried because she was "sinning" -- not on criminal or misdemeanor charges ... :rolleyes:

Considering that his/her target audience can be, and is, multi-cultural in nature, isn't it rather presumptuous to assume that they all believe in the same god? :rolleyes: Let me get this straight: I am allegedly biased because I did not mention enough Gods to satisfy a multicultural userbase? If this is so, you have massively misunderstood not only the point, but the entirety of the article too. Oh -- I've understood the article well and good enough -- I am merely stating that your bias towards a Christian mono-theistic standard demonstrates your inability to understand that there are people who may worship other gods (or no gods whatsoever), and don't share your sense of morality and the net effect of the iconic/hero worship cycle ... Frankly, I find your "holier than thou" stance to be somewhat arrogant, but that's to be expected when someone believes in only one god, and doesn't accept that other gods may or may not exist within the same universal framework.

Hi Bly. <3: I've missed you! It's nice to see you back, hun. You have been missed. ;) So -- quests? Have you done them all?