Baron Samedi

[size=1][quote name='Garelock']I'm not saying that we should igive America to the Muslim faith but what I am saying is that land should be shared. You neglected to get that point in my previous reply. I don't think it's right to shoot someone over some Earth. Really, would YOU kill me over something like this?[/quote] Oh, sure, but seriously. Why not rename the country Muslimia, put radicals in charge. But, as long as they let you live there as well. Sorry. I am not referring in any derogatory manner to Muslims, just using that as an example. And as I said, if you'd read some of the rest of this thread, you'd realise why this answer is impractical, as I did. [quote name='James']A free flow would probably make matters worse. If you eliminate the border, you're basically merging the countries. And that's what everyone is trying to avoid. I mean, if that's what the goal was, then it'd be totally okay for Israel to colonize the Palestinean territories and just absorb them.[/quote] The radicals on both sides would not accept it, as James pointed out. A person doesn't shoot another person for land, a country does.[/size]

[size=1]Nice report there. Very interesting. It also brings to mind people who don't read the Legal notices that come with much software, or people who fail to read manuals [though that is less related to your experiement]. At my school, we've had something like that done to us. We're given a sheet with a whole ton of questions/instructions on it, but told to read them all before we begin filling them out. The last instruction tells you to write your name on the sheet and turn it over, and wait for everyone else. Out of my class, I was the only person [I think] to not do everything the sheet told me to :p[/size]

[size=1][quote name='Chabichou']For instance, you can never find the exact location of an electron. Why? An eletron is everywhere at the same time within the atom.[/quote] Unless I'm off the mark, you are mistaken here. Not in the fact that scientists can never know exactly where the electron is at the exact moment it is there, but in why. The why is that the tiny photons they fire at the electorn to determine it's location actually push the electron away. They alter its course. Something else interesting I've heard is that some particles [like electrons, or quarks, or something] actually react to being observed. I think this may be something to do with the whole re-direction by the photons, but I can't quite recall at the moment. [quote=Altron]You would need some sort of G-nullifier, which reduces the G's to something humans can withstand. Doesn't need to be comfortable, but survivable. Maybe 2-3 (about a roller coaster). Maybe a gel or something that can some how absorb the Gs. Or... better yet, and more creative would be a floating section within the craft, that way there would be no Gs. The problem with this is that the acceleration would make the section hit the craft, and the people would slam into the wall coming towards them. Do you think that cryogenics could be a more plasible solution? You're already knocked out, therefore the G's wouldn't mess you up (unless we're talking light speed), and you could be awaken when you reach your destination. The sad, sad fact of the matter is, however that we dont have a source of energy to propel a craft that fast, and we dont have materials strong enough to keep the craft in a solid shape. I'm thinking that a rip in the time-space continuum is humanity's best bet.[/quote] I've seen a video about some guy who was moving super, super-fast. His face was so distorted, it wasn't even funny. G-forces react to the Law of Inertia. Essentially, until you reach light-speed you would be experiencing massive G-forces. Unsurvivable ones. And if you wanted to turn in a faster-than-light ship, not only would you be a thousand miles beyond the point by the time you turned it, the directional G-forces would be seriously nasty. G-forces are essentially the effect that occurs, as a body tends to remain at rest or continue in a straight line until another force is applied. Even if you're in a floating section of the craft, you're still going to get G's. And cryogenics...well, the effect is that when you reach your 'G-limit' you pass out. Also, you can often not balance, as the minerals in your ears that are used for balance crystallise. Happens to Nascar drivers. Now, imagine the types of G's at faster than light speed. G-forcs don't culminate in you being blacked-out. That is a side-effect. G-forces culminate when your body is ripped apart. And I'm sorry, but I had to laugh at that last sentence. It is just such a catchphrase. Any sci-fi inclined six year old could tell me that. Do you even know what the 'time-space continuum' is? I'm not being nasty here....it was just funny, but at the same time very unrealistic. And...silly, lol. [quote name='Freude']We create a machine within the craft that will house the equipment and at the same time counteract the acceleration of the craft. Thus, as the result of these opposite accelerations, we can make the G's approach tolerable levels.[/quote] Thats a wonderful idea, lol. But, how are we going to do that? Is there any method to do it? No. Or at least, as far as I'm aware. I imagine that if some way of overcoming massive G-forces had been found, someone would have said something. This reminds me of a book I read. About the shortest path from A to B is not a straight line, but if you 'crumpled' the distance between them. The book was about some secret US project involving invisibility applied to a ship in WWII, I think. Nasty side-effects for the men involved, apparently. But the thing is, I'm not sure at this stage if it was fiction or not, or based upon true occurrences...[/size]

[size=1][quote name='Garelock']I mean REALLY, is it THAT serious?! It's just a bunch of dirt, stupids animals and idiotic people![/quote] Then lets give America to Muslim fanatics. I mean, it's only land. And if you'd read the rest of this thread, you'd realise that such solutions have already been broached...and generally discarded.[/size]

[size=1]Referees are only human...but if they were crossing the line, I'd take that information somewhere. I've dealt with unfair refereeing. I've been pulled up unfairly too. Sometimes you just have to get together with your team afterwards and have a good old bitching session :p[/size]

[size=1][quote name='James']Just to pick up on that point, I don't think that there is anything negative about point-by-point dissection. I'd say it's actually the opposite.[/quote] Heh. I wasn't suggesting any negative connotations about it: Just referring to the people who were. I do agree with you, that breaking down a person's post to fully analyse various areas of it is useful, and often interesting, producing better discussion. However, it is when someone will only take a small part of a whole post, or take miniscule pieces of text and blatantly misconstrue them that I get irritated. I won't say I haven't been guilty of doing that to people, but sometimes it is justified. Maybe not all the times that I have done it, but generally. However it is the constant repetition of such acts that lowers the quality, turning discussion into witty, funny, but ultimately useless and vicious one-liners. Geez. Here I am, and it sounds like I am bagging OL! Seriously though, that is part of the deal. If you don't like it, avoid contentious threads. Or, don't read other people's replies, lol.[/size]

[size=1]A bigger barrier than most things to travelling at or above the speed-of-light is G-forces. People black out around 8-9G's and travelling at light-speed would require some kind of method for overcoming this. And as for accessing other dimensions, the idea is nice and could well be plausible. But possible? Not iminently. We don't even know about other dimensions. In regards to accessible, traversable dimensions, that is.[/size]

[size=1]I was about to say, "speaking of heated arguments, point-by-point dissection and thread hi-jacking..." But anyway, I digress now, lol. In regards to 'straw-men' , which Xander Harris brought up, I don't think that is much of an issue...because, typically, quotes in signatures [especially of members] are there to be humourous. Lore's one is humorous, as the protagonist [the infamous, Lone Wolf...] tells people to read what he wrote, [i]but to not read what he didn't[/i]. Which is funny, and certainly quotable. In the end though, that is the accepted norm here. Heated debates, mostly-intelligent arguments, and basically a fun place. I love it.[/size]

[size=1]In regards to 'illegal occupation' would it be fair to say that most modern countries were formed that way? Picture the Brits marching into America and Australia...Rome conquering vast tracts of land. Thats expansion for you.[/size]

[size=1]I'd like to know why having an age where it is widely accepted that you are physically and emotionally ready for sex is a bad thing. Sexual maturity, ie. the capacity of your body to fulfil your gender's role in the perpetuation of humankind, is not the only factor involved in the "Do I or Don't I?" aspect of sex. I'd say that people around the 16-18 age range are reaching or have reached the stage in their lives where they have a) the physical capabilities and b) the mental/emotional capablities to have sex and deal with any of the possible ramifications of it. It doesn't really matter if you're ready at 14, or 15. Or 13, as the case may be. If you're that stunningly mature, then you'll see the sense in the law, and you'll also be mature enough to wait and realise that sex is not the be-all and end-all.[/size]

[size=1]When people complain about the lack of new, quality threads in the Lounge, I have only one thing to say to them: Why don't you make one? I think that is why many people see there as being a problem with the Lounge. Because there aren't enough original threads. But, really, how much discussion inspiring material is there to be had? I don't think there is anything wrong with the Lounge. It is reasonably active, and tends to have at least one thread [if not more] active at a time, which interests me. What is there to complain about? Threads stay mostly on topic, though it is good when discussions morph into something else. Because, when you discuss things IRL, the conversation progresses, and my one suggestion would be that threads be allowed to progress naturally here as they do IRL. At any time returning to the original matter is good, but covering issues brought up within the thread is useful as well. Overall though, the OL is fine. In my opinion, anyway.[/size]

[size=1][quote=Adahn] If your argument is based on the ability of someone to raise a child, then should we restrict the sexual activity of poor people? A 15 year old with middle-class supportive parents would have a better ability to raise a child than an older couple lacking necessary resources. [/quote] Maybe we should, but this is on a general basis, based on something easier to quantify. It is easier [and more intelligent] to base sexual age limitations on...age. And, I never said that it matters how well they raise the baby, just whether they have the ability to. Money good parents makes not. You're arguing that people should be able to walk through walls, because there is more empty spaces in atoms than anything else. It is logical, but stupid. Are you saying that women are not more at risk of being taken advantage of? Are you saying that just because we can, we should? Some 11 year old girls have the capability to have children. Ask yourself, if it is right for an 11 year old girl and a 40 year old man to have sex and procreate? They can. But should they?[/size]

[size=1]Communism has sound principles, except for the key ingredient: Humans. Somebody always wants to be king of the dung-heap, and having everyone as equals is a difficult concept. At the other end of the scale, why would you want to work incredibly hard as a doctor, when you could work slack-days as a garbage collector, and recieve the same amount? Only in an autonomous society could Communism work. People are two things. Lazy and greedy. I'm not saying this as a negative shading on all people, but people want to get the most possible output [in this case x] with the least input [in this case y]. If x is a constant [which it is, because everyone gets the same] then y can be anything. Even if y is a paltry figure, they'll get the same x. Which is why communsim won't work in a human society. It doesn't encourage effort, intitiative, or any other positive qualities of Capitalism. Not that Capitalism is necessarily that great either.[/size]

[size=1][quote=Adahn]I believe it is more due to the immaturity of some teenagers, the lack of responsibility they may have towards sex, and the fact that older men can generally exert alot of pressure on a young girl. Define the necessary level of maturity. Quantify some. Clarify may. Help me to understand how you can use fact and generally together like that. Quantify and explain alot of pressure. Define young girl and explain to me how it doesn't apply to young men.[/quote] Would you disagree that it is widely accepted that you have reached the necessary level of maturity, responsibility and intelligence by 17-18? This is a general thing, not a case-by-case basis. Should a 15 year old be looking after a baby? I can easily use 'fact' and 'generally' because the laws of English allow you to. In that circumstance of usage, at least. If you find that wrong, then re-think it. Sure, it applies to young men, but young women are at a higher level of endangerment, because women are generally the ones who are taken advantage of. Agreed? Pressure could be an older man making moves on a younger girl...and because she looks up to him, in awe [if you will], she could submit, unwillingly. I used to think you had a modicum of intelligence...but your views on acceptable ages for sex concern me. [quote name='Adahn']You're equating an innocent couple to a mass-murdering terrorist. I could use more adjectives, but those will do. Some people don't write conventionally. I find it difficult to pull anything out of 'idea form' without a great deal of effort, and that's why I get attacked.[/quote] Then I'll compare Rin and Ranger to Taylor Hewitt and Dayday. Is that more accurate? I think so. Apologies for unwisely choosing my initial comparison.[/size]

[size=1]I know there is a deeply-rooted enmity between these two countries [or, some of the people] but if someone, hypothetically, merged these two countries, then what would happen? If there was no border between Israel and Pakistan? I can't imagine a mass movement of people, but a free flow between the two countries...would that be enough to appease them? I fully acknowledge the limits of the imagination that I am pushing. I doubt such a maneouvre could be pulled off. But, what if they could do that? Would it stand a chance of working? This way, both sides make the same compromise. I don't know. I am no politico-person, and perhaps I am just rambling. As a hypothetical though, could it work?[/size]

[size=1]Obviously, there may be some things different, but you have to look at it like ripples in a pond. How big a splash would it make? Would the pond be calm again? [i.e. could the same things occur a different way] And how far do the ripples spread? I think that it wold be relatively similar to what we have today. Some group, somewhere would have come to the principle of democracy. But we can only hypothesize, never know.[/size]

[size=1]This sounds like a semi-regular occurrence, and action does need to be taken. Tell your brother what Lincoln says, and how you feel. And tell him that if you ever catch wind that he might have done something like this again, you will ring the authorities, and tell them all of what happened. That way you strike the fear of Lincoln, you, and the authorities in him, and hopefully pressure him out of doing it again. On a side note, how old is your brother?[/size]

[size=1]But what would extremists do if both sides formally withdrew all forces from the Gaza Strip / West Bank? Go and blow up the other side, who doesn't own the land either? Blow up their own precious, god-given side? What would they do? As far as I can see it, nothing. Which is what we want them doing. The majority of people want peace. Surely the Governments are mostly free from radicals? Therefore, pushing through a quick withdrawal should not be a terrible problem? Obviously, this is simplified beyond belief. But at the same time, doesn't it make sense?[/size]

[size=1][quote name='Adahn']Statutory rape is really a funny thing. It basically says that one is not old enough to make decisions about sexual activity until one reaches a certain age. Excuse me, but, is a 15-year old incapable of making conscious decisions? Is there a line we can draw based on age where people on one side can't make decisions, but after one day, they are suddenly capable of doing so? One could argue that it is for the best interests of the majority, but if we are to look at politics these days, there truly is a fine line between the majority and the minority.[/quote] I believe it is more due to the immaturity of some teenagers, the lack of responsibility they may have towards sex, and the fact that older men can generally exert a lot of pressure on a young girl. But, hey, you enjoy Rin and Ranger's company. That probably makes no sense to you, right? Sorry. Personal jibes aside, all my points are valid. [quote=Adahn]Oh, on a side note, I'd like to point out how happy and amused I am at seeing all the talk about Rin and Ranger. You two are very interesting people, and despite Siren's beliefs, I am confident that we all enjoy your presence and comments here. [/quote] I'd like to think you were being sarcastic, but anyway, we all talked about Bin Laden, but I don't know how many of us enjoyed it. [quote name='Adahn']Baron, Lady Rin, and desertranger; did Lady Rin not answer the question? She wouldn't have answered if she were offended (I think), so I don't really see an argument. If you want to discuss morality and etiquette, start a new thread. It's a worthy topic.[/quote] Lady Rin did answer the question, though her comment in it was liable to be taken both ways. It was desertrangers' comments which were innapropriate, I feel, and brought this whole thing to light. Plus, the discussion of whether or not Rin and Ranger read the question correctly, and whether such information as the age difference was important, was necessary. [quote name='Rin']And that makes you think he doesn't. Not only that he does it for real. I have shoved him onto the same corner used for the children for ill-mannered behavior at the Alamo, a place not known for its manners. The purpose behind timeout can be found in Zen which I have taught the children.[/quote] That is stupid. If a grown person, cannot actively review their own actions without being put in a corner like some naughty toddler, there is something seriously wrong. As it stands, your relationship sounds strange. I mean, is Ranger a human, or is he a puppydog? [quote name='Rin']There actually is a reason. Most women don't want to be reminded of their age. Especially after their 29th birthday. Mrs H my supervisor is that way, she's 36 and goes overboard on how her body looks. Another example is Lilah, an aquaintance, she's my age. She does botox, had a tummy tuck, enhanced her boobs *giggles* She does everything she can to look younger than she really is . She doesn't like birthday parties and doesn't want any gifts that day since it does remind her of her age. That's why you don't ask. I don't mind. I am comfortable with myself and apperance.[/quote] DO I LOOK LIKE I CARE ABOUT THE WOMEN IN YOUR WORLD?! No. You are stubbornly refusing to look at the point of this: I did not ask your age. An oblique reference, sure, but it was necessary AND YOU BROUGHT IT UP! Do, the capitals help? For the 'Why Laura was shocked' part, I don't give a **** about statutory rape. Laura doesn't have to be shocked about the sex side of things. If you didn't start going out with Ranger until you were 19, there is still a big age difference there. But why did you say 14 before? Sarcasm is obviously not your forte. [quote name='Baron']As for 'time-out', the whole point of something like that is that people must care about their online selves, and care about the person who is putting them in 'time-out'. And frankly, I care about my online self, but I don't care about 'time-out'. Especially as I did nothing wrong.[/quote] You can giggle and spread pink linky love all over the place, but you didn't answer the question, or indeed make any logical reference to what I said. [quote name='Rin']If you don't care about your online self then it shouldn't matter if I say you are ill-mannered or have no manners. In fact I shouldn't be able to hurt your feelings at all since you don't care about your online self.[/quote] I never said I didn't care about my online self. Literacy, anyone? [quote name='Rin']Not really. What has happened is parents have stopped teaching etiquette and manners. Don't wear a hat inside, help a lady (your girlfriend, mother) take a seat at a table and hold doors open for people. You should try googling etiqutte and manners. You might look here and here chosen at random from a quick google search.[/quote] Wrong. The definitions [practical] have changed. Sure,opening a door for someone, being polite, they're all good. Taking a hat off in a restaurant, sure. But some things are dated, and I refer you to Siren's post, which as usual was correct, though acerbic.[/size]

[size=1]I've had this deep thought about the intelligence of people who avoid grammar. But, I wouldn't want to share it with most of you. You might blow a fuse! The 'TV staying on' idea is silly. Not only is it caused by particles being fired at a screen, but even though the broadcast continues when your TV is off, it isn't real. Its like saying that people on a video-tape are real. They're not.[/size]

[size=1]Where do you get them? As in, what sites seem to trigger the ads? A screenshot would be perfect. Also, what AV do you use, and how often do you update it? Apart from checking those things, the only other thing I can suggest is using another browser [i.e Firefox] for your browsing. Check [url]www.mozilla.org[/url] for Firefox.[/size]

[size=1]I don't see why you're putting this here, or what it has to do with the mods. None of these sites are even related to theOtaku-[Franchise] in any way, shape or form. That aside, Solo's approach is the best. You have to approach the owners of the site personally, or launch a devatsating Web-wide smear campaign. Actually, forget I said that. Just approach the site owners.[/size]

[size=1][i]Thats the last time you'll ever eat wood-pigeon...[/i] And yes, I am perfectly aware it is a penguin. Artistic license.[/size]

[size=1]Only if the TV on your TV is actually a shot of the camera that they were using at the time. But why does that matter? Who cares if we are the dream or the dreamers? We think we are real, and thats all that matters. Characters in a book are better than characters that aren't, and thats all that matters. The logic says that yes, the tree will make a sound when it falls. Just because you can't see it, and don't know it is going to fall doesn't mean anything. Is there any reason a tree wouldn't make a sound? No. And thats what matters. Notice the repetition of the word 'matter'? It is because several of these things don't matter [like the, err, infinite TVs >_>] but also because we will never know if other people are a reality or not, will we. The only logical way to live your life is to assume that they are.[/size]

[size=1][quote name='Rin']Ranger was actually correct. It alright for a lady to make reference to her age but not for a man to ask about it even after she has made reference to it. So I shall ask what is your age since you know mine? Are you male or female, it's hard to tell online.[/quote] Considering the 'Baron' part of my name, I think it would be logical to assume that I am a guy, which I am, and that I am 15. Now, I will explain [again!] why asking about your age [i]difference[/i] was fair game. You said that this Laura L was shocked by the age difference between you and Ranger, and that you had been going together since you were 14. Now, we want to know [i]why[/i] Laura was shocked, don't we? If you weren't going to tell us, someone was going to have to ask, because such a question is important. Did Laura have reason to be shocked or not? As a young person [14 or 19 or whatever the case may be] I would most definitely consider 17 years to be [i]too large a gap[/i]. This is simply because one partners age is roughly double anothers. Now, it would depend upon the people in the relationship, and once you are 19 what you do [i]is[/i] your own business, but I would likely view that relationship as innapropriate. Does nobody agree with me? As for 'time-out', the whole point of something like that is that people must care about their online selves, and care about the person who is putting them in 'time-out'. And frankly, I care about my online self, but I don't care about 'time-out'. Especially as I did nothing wrong. I think Ranger should be put in 'time-out' to take a look at his suitability in his choice of replies. Bet he doesn't even care that I said that. You see, I know I am in the right. This is 2004, not some dated time-period, and the definitions of manners and etiquette has changed. And I dare you to say that I have no manners. [quote name='Rin']mis-understand what other people are trying to say[/quote] Which you have done on occasion, don't be shy about it. [quote name='Rin']You boss is a female and you ask her that or some other dumb personal question the way the Baron did.[/quote] If my boss had brought up that when she was young, a friend of hers was shocked at the age difference between her and her partner, if she didn't mention the age difference herself [which clever people would], I would ask her. And the thing is, it would be OK to ask her. About the [i]age difference[/i]. Which proves my case. [quote=Rin]Now I have a few questions. What would you do in a similar situation. Some bimbo or bimbette is making passes at your man or vice-versa[/quote] Who says I need to do anything? I would stand protectively near my partner, but I would trust in my partner. [quote name='Rin']Baron, are you in a relationship? Tell us about it if you would please. Also what dumb things have you said to her/him. Maybe your last major public gaff.[/quote] No, I'm not in a relationship at the moment.[/size]