BlueTear
-
Posts
649 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by BlueTear
-
-
But the act of burning something does not inherently suggest hostility. Or, without copy and paste repetiton; No, it does not. Again; You're free to think Dan an idiot for burning a flag, but it's silly to argue that he was expressing hostility because he used fire (Cremation was only mentioned as an example to show that fire is not a sign of disrespect because it is fire, I wasn't drawing parallells to what Dan did with his flag), and it's still silly to be offended by the fiery destruction of a piece of cloth.While I apologize, since I did blow past your point, but all I'm saying is that burning anything will typically be for a hostile reason, particularly a flag.Most if not all of the "offense" taken in this thread was also followed by immediate disrepect for, and I've said this before, the legal and ethical code it's meant to symbolize. As to the why? Because you can instill a since of reverence for a symbol into a 4 year old without any trouble. Reverence for philosophical concepts like the rule of law is harder, and requires some actual thougth. It's easy to revere a symbol for freedom, hard to actually understand and respect the concepts behind it.
(I just remembered something I forgot to mention in regards to someone's way earlier comment on where you get a hold of a foreign flag to burn in the first place; In an exceptional display of geographic knowledge, attempts to burn a Danish flag a few years ago resulted in the unfortunate demise of a Swiss flag. They're like, right next to eac... Well, no. But if you squint while looking at them, it's almost like burning a Danish flag! The thing was, much to the amusement of everyone with a clue, televised too but I can't for the life of remember exactly when. I havn't tried finding it on YouTube though, so that might be possible if anyone feels like trying.)
-
With the release of upcoming content patch players will see a change in the way we allow buffs and debuffs to stack exclusively in a raid. For the most part, what this change means is that many buffs and debuffs that were previously allowed to stack together no longer can, and that many buffs and debuffs that only a single talent specialization could bring can now be brought by multiple different specializations. The philosophy behind this change shows up in many of the changes we have made in Wrath of The Lich King, such as when we made almost all buffs raid-wide. We want players to be able to form raids and parties based on who they want to play with, rather than who has the correct talents and abilities to min-max their raid performance.
Raid composition will still matter to some extent, but without this change, it would have overwhelmed every other aspect of raid planning (as we added new capabilities to each of 30 different talent trees). You no longer need to rigidly control the melee/spellcaster balance of your raid, or make sure every group has all the critical buffing classes, etc. This change has many class balance implications.
IMPORTANT! Before we are done, we will thoroughly test the performance of every class. It should not be assumed that one class' current performance relative to others in beta is final. Some classes (and specializations) will need to be reduced in power and some increased. Many may feel the change has more impact on class X than class Y. We will address all of those concerns via our internal testing and community feedback.
There are thirty or so different categories into which buffs and debuffs fit. Here you will find a comprehensive list of the changes made broken down by category and which spells/talents are in that category.
Armor Debuff (Major): Acid Spit (exotic Hunter pet), Expose Armor, Sunder Armor
Armor Debuff (Minor): Faerie Fire, Sting (Hunter pet), Curse of Recklessness
Physical Vulnerability Debuff: Blood Frenzy, (2nd Talent Spec TBA)
Melee Haste Buff: Improved Icy Talons, Windfury Totem
Melee Critical Strike Chance Buff: Leader of the Pack, Rampage
Attack Power Buff (Flat Add): Battle Shout, Blessing of Might
Attack Power Buff (Multiplier): Abomination's Might, Trueshot Aura, Unleashed Rage
Ranged Attack Power Buff: Hunter's Mark (only Hunters benefit, so no need to exclude against other class abilities)
Bleed Damage Increase Debuff: Mangle, Trauma
Spell Haste Buff: Wrath of Air Totem
Spell Critical Strike Chance Buff: Moonkin Aura, Elemental Oath
Spell Critical Strike Chance Debuff: Improved Scorch, Winter's Chill
Increased Spell Damage Taken Debuff: Ebon Plaguebringer, Earth and Moon, Curse of the Elements
Increased Spell Power Buff: Focus Magic, Improved Divine Spirit, Flametongue Totem, Totem of Wrath, Demonic Pact
Increased Spell Hit Chance Taken Debuff: Improved Faerie Fire, Misery
Percentage Haste Increase (All Types): Improved Moonkin Aura, Swift Retribution
Percentage Damage Increase: Ferocious Inspiration, Sanctified Retribution
Critical Strike Chance Taken Debuff (All types): Heart of the Crusader, Totem of Wrath
Melee Attack Speed Slow Debuff: Icy Touch, Infected Wounds, Judgements of the Just, Thunderclap
Melee Hit Chance Reduction Debuff: Insect Swarm, Scorpid Sting
Healing Debuff: Wound Poison, Aimed Shot, Mortal Strike, Furious Attacks
Attack Power Debuff: Demoralizing Roar, Curse of Weakness, Demoralizing Shout
Stat Multiplier Buff: Blessing of Kings
Stat Add Buff: Mark of the Wild
Agility and Strength Buff: Strength of Earth Totem, Horn of Winter
Stamina Buff: Power Word: Fortitude
Health Buff: Commanding Shout, Blood Pact
Intellect Buff: Arcane Intellect, Fel Intelligence
Spirit Buff: Divine Spirit, Fel Intelligence
Damage Reduction Percentage Buff: Grace, Blessing of Sanctuary
Percentage Increase Healing Received Buff: Tree of Life, Improved Devotion Aura
Armor Increase Percentage Buff: Inspiration, Ancestral Healing
Cast Speed Slow: Curse of Tongues, Slow, Mind-numbing Poison.
In each category, you can only benefit from the most powerful spell granting that effect. For example, Fel Intelligence grants spirit and intellect, both weaker than Arcane Intellect and Divine Spirit. If a player has Fel Intelligence and receives a stronger Arcane Intellect buff, he will gain the intellect value from Arcane Intellect and the spirit value from Fel Intelligence.
In most cases, fully-talented players will have exactly equal power on the strength of these buffs and debuffs. Fel Intelligence is an example of where one ability is weaker than others. The buffs in the "Increased Spell Power Buff" category are also not all the same potency, as they scale and grow in radically different ways. In virtually every other case, however, the buffs are equal. This means, for example, that fully-talented Battle Shout and Blessing of Might now grant the exact same amount of attack power.
In addition to this change, we also needed to address the "mana battery" roles in a raid. The mana regeneration effect they grant is no longer limited to their own party, and it no longer depends on the amount of damage they deal. Each time they trigger the mana regeneration effect, 10 people in their raid group will receive a buff which causes them to regenerate 0.5% of their maximum mana each second. This buff, Replenishment, will be given preferentially to raid members with the lowest mana, but will re-evaluate which raid members receive it each time it is fired. Replenishment is provided by Shadow Priests, Survival Hunters, and Retribution Paladins.
Finally, we have modified Heroism and Bloodlust to affect the entire raid. However, all affected raid members will be unable to cast or benefit from Bloodlust/Heroism for 5 minutes.
Below you will find a list of the changes to abilities which exhibit new behavior regardless of the exclusive categories. The changes usually mean the old behavior was removed and replaced by the new behavior. Numbers listed are for maximally-talented versions. Here is that list of changes:
Improved Scorch: Increases spell critical strike chance against the target.
Winter's Chill: Also increases spell critical strike chance against the target.
Elemental Oath: Grants 5% spell crital strike to raid members.
Improved Moonkin Aura: Grants 3% haste of all types.
Earth and Moon: Increases spell damage taken from all schools by 13% on the target.
Misery: Causes spells cast at the target to have +3% spell hit.
Shadow Weaving: Buffs only self.
Improved Shadow Bolt: Buffs only self.
Expose Weakness: Buffs only self.
Shadow Embrace: Buffs only self.
Blood Pact: Grants health instead of Stamina.
Fel Intelligence: Has replacement ranks that grant flat values of Intellect and Spirit.
Frost Aura: Excludes properly against all other resistance buffs.
Grace: Reduces damage taken by target by 3%.
Rampage: Increases melee and ranged critical strike chance by 5% for the raid.
Improved Faerie Fire: No longer benefits melee and ranged hit chance, only spell hit.
Hunter's Mark: No longer increases attack power bonus from attacks against the target.
Improved Hunter's Mark: No longer grants melee attack power.
Sting (Hunter pet): Now acts as a minor armor debuff.
Waylay: Attack speed reduction changed to 20%.
Icy Touch: Only slows melee attack speed (not ranged or spell).
Tree of Life: No longer grants healing based on spirit, grants 3% increased healing received to raid.
Demonic Pact: Now buffs raid instead of debuffing monsters.
Focus Magic: Now buffs raid instead of debuffing monsters.
Totem of Wrath: Now grants a flat amount of spell damage, and all enemies in its radius have an increased chance of being struck by criticals.
Heroism: Cannot be recast while caster has Exhausted debuff, and those with Exhausted debuff cannot be affected by it.
Bloodlust: Cannot be recast while caster has Sated debuff, and those with Sated debuff cannot be affected by it.
Vampiric Touch: Grants Replenishment mana regeneration buff to up to 10 raid members on dealing damage.
Hunting Party: Grants Replenishment mana regeneration buff to up to 10 raid members on specified shots.
Judgements of the Wise: Grants Replenishment mana regeneration buff to up to 10 raid members on Judging.
Or, in not quite so many words, just about every single talent tree has been to a lesser or greater extent invalidated and is now in dire need of complete overhaul, starting with everyone who would previously have earned their raiding slots based on the utility they offered.
Interesting times, indeed.
-
You blew way past my point. You certainly can burn something with hostile intent. Give me enough time, and I can probably figure out a way to breathe with hostile intent.DaN's already said he did it for "curiosity", and has defended that by saying he simply has the right to do it. I seriously doubt he knows a single other act to be done when retiring a flag. That "point" (I suppose?) is useless.But the act of burning something does not inherently suggest hostility. Cremation, a religious tenant for billions of hindus and buddhists, is not a sign of disrespect nor hostility. Burning a used flag, is not a sign of hostility. Intent/context matters, and attempting to argue that fire is always a form of desecreation is just plain silly, which is both what Zierro and you did.
If DaN said he didn't do it for hostility, then whether you consider his stated reason valid or not, going on and on about how burning a flag clearly is an extreme form of desecreation makes no sense.
-
Depends on what the position actually entails. If it is the same ol' same ol' any plodder can do, sure, grab the guy who's been plodding for a decade. If it's fast position in a fast moving business where innovation matters, grabbing an "inexperienced" candidate not tainted by "this is how it's always done" can be a considerable asset to your company. "Experience" and "performance" are only really inseparable in RPGs.mage, just because a piece of research doesn't show it, does it mean it's true? If you could hire your boss, would you choose someone who's had decades (I believe?) less experience than another candidate? I'm talking sheer experience. Charisma and the like are a major factor, but experience is still an important part.(Having said that though, I'm just pointing out the flaws on the reasoning, not saying who I'd vote for)
-
As has already been mentioned in this thread, fire is the proper way to dispose of a used flag. Cremation is also a widely spread practice across many religious (and non-religious) denominations. "Burning something" is not an inherently hostile act.I think burning something shows a little more hostility than words do. Like I said, fire is one of the most extreme forms of desecration.And again; Assaulting someone for pissing on a symbol is showing more reverence to the symbol itself than to the ethical and legal codes people have died to protect. Though of course, worshipping a symbol is certainly easier than upholding moral values.
edit: Way to mess up sentence.
-
Yeh, 'cause letting something as mundance as reality get in the way of your thinking is just totally not the way to go, like, ever.It's what it represents, not what the reality of the situation is. You're looking at the situation as if it were just a piece of cloth.I'm perfectly willing to do violence to protect democracy. I'm perfectly willing to do violence to protect human rights. But equaling the latter with being willing to do violence in order to protect a symbol of human rights - whether the symbol is document containing the human rights, a statue or a piece of cloth - is, to put it mildly, ridicolous.
You want to show respect for the people who made the rights you have possible, you excercise them. You protect them. You don't laud violence - in direct contradition to the the same rights - protecting symbols of what people fought and killed for.
-
Did they give their lives for a symbol traditionally displayed on a piece of apparently flammable cloth, or for a collection of moral, ethical and political values...?It might be legal but if I ever saw anyone do it they would be in the hospital. People have died for that flag.I know I'd be pretty upset if some jackass assaulted someone else because of their treatment of an empty symbol rather than showing due respect for, say, the legal code I died to protect.
-
Who are "they"?So they're trying to shelter us from suicide and cutting.I mean, are we talking a bunch of opinionated rich white elderly males who sit around and decide on the moral statue passing through their media, or is "they" part of a public who'll sue the crap out of anything found moderately offensive, whether they chose to expose themselves to it in the first place or not...
-
Until you've shown that binge drinking is not an inherent part of the drinking culture in the US, it has a significantly higher relevance than responsible drinking culture in Spain.I agree that an early onset of binge drinking will increase risk of dependence, but as I was referring to responsible use I don't see how this is relavent.
Since it actually does list the criteria it uses for alcohol dependance rather clearly, I'll assume you're refering to the manner in which drinking started, to which I'll answer; Does it really matter, on the basis of the drinking culture in question? You can theoretically argue that early drinking does not neccesarily mean a higher dependence, and cite other countries with a different drinking culture. But for all practical intents and purposes, that culture does not exist in the US, the UK or Scandinavia, and thus talking about it is a theoretical excercise with scant connection to reality.Is this the paper you are referring to? If so -- I'm not sure if that's the greatest source. For one, it does not make a clear distinction between responsible drinking and alcohol abuse, a distinction that is absolutely necessary in any study regarding alcohol dependence.The people who do not drink until they are 21 who live in the US, are less likely to suffer from alcohol dependance. The fact that the same doesn't hold true in Spain is nice, but of little consequence to a discussion regarding youth drinking in the US. You can't disregard the findings of a study examining youth drinking the USA because a similar study performed in Spain would give a different result, when the topic at hand is youth drinking in the USA.
In my personal opinion, trust is a two way street. You show up at home drunk - which I'm going to define as irresponsible use - you've at least temporarily forfeit any given right to a personal life. I'm not saying you should demand the password to your childs facebook the moment your child gets one, but as the adult in the little arragnment, if you suspect there's something there you or another parent needs to know based on the state your child came home in, I say go for it.Most parents are not so ignorant that they need to be told when their children are drunk and/or high -- the smell alone is a dead giveaway, and impairment is usually quite easy to notice. However, I agree; I would want to know what my children are doing to ensure that it is responsible and not detrimental to themselves or others. However, the way to figure this out is not to snoop or prod into their personal life, which is often seen as interruption, but to give them space and openly discuss alcohol/drug use with them.
1) Yes. Good parents are not ignorant. I'm not saying they should run a miniaturized version of Stasi at home, but if your child violates your trust in a way that makes you want more information, then sitting on your hands in aquiring that information is not acceptable. Again, what you choose to do with that information is one thing - and personally, I lean more towards talking it over extensively than house arrests - but a parent can't look the other way out of convenience.So you are saying the mother was justified in invading the privacy of hundreds of students, which lead to many suspensions, and in turn potentially destroyed her daughter's high school life?2) "leads to many suspensions" falls under the category of "Can't do the time, don't do the crime". Quite frankly, if you do something that will get you in trouble if caught - no matter how you're caught - you can't blame someone else. The mother did not put them in spotlight, they walked there on their own. Quite frankly, the whole "it's not my fault, I'm not being punished for something *I* did" evident in at least one of the articles in the OP scares me more than underage drinking ever will.
3) Freakishly enough, I don't rate high-school reputation above irresponsible use of what is for that age an illegal substance, and the idea of protection my daughters high school reputation by witholding relevant information from other parents strikes me as downright irresponsible.
But then you're back to making choices for them. In your opinion, it's a minor thing. Depending on the age and the amount consumed, I agree with you, it is minor - it still warrants a series of talks at home, but not a house arrest - but I can't honestly say I am qualified to make that same choice for other parents, nor do I think you're qualified to make that choice for me if it involvs my child.If it were a matter of a real infraction or harm -- such as murder, fraud, trafficking, substance abuse, rape, etc. -- then the situation would be entirely different.
And luckily, the track record for youth drinking in the USA is all about drinking responsibly...But the case here seems to be a very minor infraction, most likely a group of kids drinking beers before they have reached a certian age, or people inducing an altered state of mind by smoking a plant. Done responsibly, these are things that do not seriously harm the individual or others.I'd also like to direct a bit of a boot to everyone who keeps saying "the school can't do that, they weren't drinking on school property". Had you actually bothered with, I don't know, READING THE THREAD rather than glancing at it sideways expecting to absorb all the relevant data through your exceptional telepathic skills, you'd have noticed the bit about signing an agreement when participating in school sport. Had you actually read any of the articles though, as opposed to concluding that "links are for nubs, real posters are all-knowing" you'd have noticed that such an agreement was indeed an important part in deciding on suspensions. In fact, one student intended to argue that the pictures were taken before he signed such an agreement, and would thus be inadmissable.
-
Last time I was involuntarily thrown into a lecture on drugs the speaker claimed that there's a coorelation between how early you start drinking, and how likely you are to develop alcohol related problems in the future.What I don't understand is why so many parents strictly enforce "no drinking" right up until the age of 21, and then the day their kid turns of age they stop caring and claim "it's their choice now". This ends up being extremely detrimental, as the kids haven't become accustomed to responsible alcohol use and often drink to the point of it being dangerous to themselves/others.Basically, he cited statistics saying that the earlier you start, the more likely you are to develop alcohol dependence. You disagree?
Interrupting, and knowing, is not the same thing. If I had a kid, I would want to know. I'm fairly certain that most other parents would as well, and if they wouldn't; Tough [cabbage], willfull ignorance does not make one a good parent, and I'd tell you anyway.In answering your question: because it's private and because it does not severely harm yourself/others. As I've said -- if you are doing something wreckless that endangers yourself or others then the parent should definitely be interrupting.What, if anything, said parents choose to do or not do about it, is open for debate. A quick talk regarding risks that should be observed, or a six months de facto house arrest. Either way, that's the choice of the parent in how they intend to raise their offspring to legal majority. Making that choice for them by withholding information regarding illegal or potentially harmful activities on the basis that you yourself manage responsible drug use... Meh, I don't buy it. I may not agree with how all parents given such information will deal with it, but I think they have a right to that information.
Moving on the other things;
On the subject of who's fault it is; If whatever you're doing gets you in trouble if it's caught on camera, you should really be paying attention to what you're doing, the cameras, or both. Can't do the time, don't do the crime. And if you leave evidence and witnesses behind, yes, that is actually your fault. You can't play helpless victim because "someone else" took photographic evidence of what you were doing at the time.
On the subject of any damages related to the parent who made the disc's child; The day parents allow themselves to be scared into refraining from doing what they believe to be morally right because the repercussions might involve people being mean to her at school, that's the day when the inmates truly start running the asylum.
-
Yeah, and then the entire Egyptian airforce left Egypt and bombed the living daylights of every single airfield in Israel so the Israeli airforce was left severly crippled. Amirite?Most Jews who live in Israel are Russian :-k
that is totally not true, and dont try to argue with me, i live in israel. i dont agree with giving back the lands, we conquered the lands in war they declared on us,
... and the palestinians who lived there before those israeli came, where are their homes?we already gave them lands about 2 years ago, and now all the israelis who lived there are homeless. -
I'm not saying gear doesn't matter - gear does matter in WoW - but if you grab 10 warriors, 10 hunters and 10 rogues all with varying degree of gear and put them up against the same decently geared warlock, assuming they all play properly, more rogues are going to win than warriors/hunters. A warrior/hunter with perfect execution of the kill strategy will trip up on gear a lot more than a rogue doing the same thing.I mean its a big thing for gear too for rogue vs lock. I'm not saying that a rogue won't win, a good rogue vs a good lock the rogue 'should' win, but he has to play correctly to do so against a top end SL lock. -
Is the reproduction of the individual really always more conducive to the survival of the species, as opposed to non-reproduction of a segment of the population?It totally impairs it. Maybe not to the extent that blindness impairs vision (although 70-80% of blind people can be cured to an extent), but no homosexual animal (besides a human) is going to reproduce. The only reason a homosexual human would reproduce cannot be explained in natural terms. Therefore I don't see how, from a purely evolutionary standpoint, homosexuality is not seen as a defect when the heterosexual gene (if one exists) is much more conducive to the survival of the species?Most of the other points I was going to bring up were brought up by others already, so I'll just pounce on that sentence.
-
No, really, warrior hunter it's about gear. They're immune to my CC's and CC's is the only defense I have except high stamina, so it becomes a question of outlasting (unless they screw up, in case it's not a question about outlasting, but a question of Don't Do That Foo'). A rogue that does a full stunlock + CloS + WotF can basically have me down to 20-40% before I get a single hit in, at which point outlasting becomes moot, because I have to no way to get him off me. Gear wise, the rogue is much more forgiving than hunter/warrior, because all he needs is the DPS to tear me to pieces during the initial stunlock; The hunter and the warrior needs the resilience/HP to stand up for as long as it takes them to kill me. Rogue just needs his abilities.A well geared rogue versus a well geared warlock is a good fight to see. The things you mentioned for the warrior and hunter are easy, just one thing to do and they're pretty good. I mean a warrior can break out of fear I don't know how many times and will just pummel the lock to death.The hunter will just pop beastial wrath and destroy him too because the lock can't do anything.
-
Gratz Nadril!
No, rogues are. Against a warrior/hunter it becomes a question of gear, all the warrior has to do is NOT PUMMEL IMMOLATE and the hunter just needs to press bestial wrath. Failure to do one of those two things properly will result in death. If you do both those things, it's gear.Hunters are a locks worst nightmare though next to arms warriors.A rogue however, assuming the rogue in question has the PvP maces, needs to screw up pretty goshdarn spectacularly to fail to meet the proper criterias for a free HK. Doubly so for an undead rogue.
-
Blindness is an impairment. Explain how homosexuality is an impairment.What do you mean by "normal species functioning", and how does it apply to homosexuality and not blindness? -
-
I'd call it natural the same way different skin colours are natural.Would you say it's natural in the same way blindness is natural? -
Surely all modern subscription based terms of service have clauses regarding temporary outings due to technical problems, as well as the general availability of whatever it is?
-
The fact that we're online rather than IRL doesn't mean we need to tolerate the kind of unabridged stupidity required to make the statement "if they're ancestor's weren't british, they're not". I don't know what he was banned for, but fresh blood and fresh morons are two different things.the main reason i edited out my posts is because people get banned for replying but "long term users" can do w/e they want, like the innocent person l0l0lpur3 got banned for pointing out what he thought because the mods dont want new users on the forum.
Which you, naturally, counter by presenting accurate and modern statistics regarding the same subject from trustworthy sources.also, people just reply with statistics from wikipedia etc, and most of the time, ANCIENT statistics from like 2001.... or wait. You don't really have those, do you?
-
Am I then to take your response to my question be something along the lines of "No, I would not, but the Pakistani Constitution is not as important as ours is"?Compare and contrast the Pakistan Constitution with the U.S. Constitution and it's not a good comparison at all.
No part of the Pakistani constitution allows the Chief of Army Staff to proclaim a state of emergency. Ignoring all the other fun, decidedly undemocratic actions taken - detaining political opponents, purging the Supreme court for pointing out the illegaility of the action taken, imposing a ban on "defaming the head of the state" - there's always that to pounce on.The elections are not a concrete part of the constitution and were amended in with the "emergency power" clause there along with it. Mussharraf's actions are legal, albeit a little overboard. -
Yes, that's why recruitment numbers as well as terrorist action has shown a downward trend over the past, say, three years.Terrorism on the other hand is hardly a source of hope for anyone. Even the most hard nosed fanatics must be able to see that the current situation cannot be maintained or made better for mankind in general.... or wait?
-
You on a trial account?Does anyone on the bladefist server want to go to deadmines with me? I can't find a group.Oh, and what should I put my talent points into before level 50? (I'm respeccing for a felguard then)
EDIT- I just stopped getting xp. I have no idea why. I'm level 20 and killing things in the 17-21 level range and I'm fully rested. I even tried turning in a quest but that gave me nothing but coins.
-
So you would then find it acceptable to have the constitution of the USA suspended as long as the 3 other things you stated weren't happening?Aside from the elections, are there any inhumane things happening in Pakistan? Are people starving? Are human rights being violated on a day to day basis? The answer is no.
Abortion
in Off-Topic
Posted
You also need to remember that "what the world can hold" and "how many people at our current standard of living the world can hold". You're probably in the top ten percentile as far as standards of living goes, and keeping starvation at bay may very well be possible for three times our total number - I don't know - but I sincerely doubt your current standard of living would be appliable. Big gap between what can be accomplished when aiming for "not starving" and "awesome quality of life". That's not even touching life expectancy.
And I can't say I understood the point about adoption numbers either. Care to clarify?