16381
Bay 12 Games Forum
- May 19, 2024, 05:47:42 am
- Welcome, Guest
News:
May 9, 2024: The May '24 Report is up.
News: April 23, 2024: Dwarf Fortress 50.13 has been released.
News: February 4, 2021: Dwarf Fortress Talk #28 has been posted.
News: November 21, 2018: A new Threetoe story has been posted.
Forum Guidelines
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
16382
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O
« on: November 23, 2014, 04:57:45 pm »Wait, orks are fungus?The WH40k ones, at least, yes. Think they're more normal in the fantasy battle stuff.
16383
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O
« on: November 23, 2014, 04:07:35 pm »Nah, I meant temporally. If the 'verses were blended, y'know. Toads as the prototype.Yeah, there'd be some weird stuff going on there. I mean, the warp provides, so it's not like it's impossible, just... very unlikely. Iirc, by 40k lore (if not perhaps WFB) the orks were flapping around before humans even developed as a species, so either the pipes are also involving temporal shenanigans or Mario & co aren't actually human in this scenario. Which, I mean. Maybe?
Of course that relies on back-stretching WG lore, and the inconsistent nature of that is... hah.
Though I suppose that would mean the koopa-kin in this scenario are proto-eldar? I guess with the magikoopas you have a baseline for the psyker predilection and they do have a sort of caste thing going on...
There'd be quite a bit of stretching and twisting to get all that to fit together, though. Could probably be done, but. Yeah.
Though... how would the goombas fit in this scenario?
16384
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O
« on: November 23, 2014, 01:59:51 pm »
Um. Actually, warhammer and the toads showed up more or less at the same time, apparently. Both in '83. So I guess only insomuch as the orks are proto-toads? Though it took a while before orks turned fungal, iirc. Still.
E: That said, the thought of replacing the toads with orks is pretty hilarious. Kinda' reminds me of that "Silly but Killy" ME/WH40k xover that replaced humans with orks.
E: That said, the thought of replacing the toads with orks is pretty hilarious. Kinda' reminds me of that "Silly but Killy" ME/WH40k xover that replaced humans with orks.
16385
General Discussion / Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« on: November 23, 2014, 12:09:30 pm »
... I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, neo. When both alcohol and tobacco are granted exemptions for no substantial reason, despite easily being as harmful and addictive as many substances that aren't exempt, weed being a controlled substance is... fairly meaningless.
As others have noted, if you want to equalize treatment of equally dangerous substances (i.e. remove the exemption for alcohol and tobacco), then... fine? You'll fail, as has been noted in the past, but you're consistent. In the mean time, decriminalization and/or legalization+regulation of weed (and, perhaps, eventually other similarly harmless recreational drugs) is, pretty much without doubt, the path of least harm and greatest benefit. The current situation does very few people good and a great deal of harm to society, and there's not really a good way to deal with that besides legalization and regulation.
As others have noted, if you want to equalize treatment of equally dangerous substances (i.e. remove the exemption for alcohol and tobacco), then... fine? You'll fail, as has been noted in the past, but you're consistent. In the mean time, decriminalization and/or legalization+regulation of weed (and, perhaps, eventually other similarly harmless recreational drugs) is, pretty much without doubt, the path of least harm and greatest benefit. The current situation does very few people good and a great deal of harm to society, and there's not really a good way to deal with that besides legalization and regulation.
16386
General Discussion / Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« on: November 23, 2014, 10:46:25 am »I don't think the facts are that vague. I assume it's already being studied in the places it's legal and we'd know about a sub-class of weeds with significant negative side effects (or whatever you're implying - enough negative effects to be worth making these strains illegal).Been studied quiet a bit even before then, iirc. It's just, y'know, there's a metric ton of bald face lies involved in anti-marijuana propaganda. And then even more completely unsupported statements and badly misconstrued or exaggerated information.
16387
General Discussion / Re: Marijuana Legalization Discussion: BE CIVIL!
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:32:48 pm »
Can't really address the OP's main question -- I'm down here in florida, where we just eeked under (<3% away from an amendment) passing legalization of medical marijuana -- but insofar as $0.02 goes, I definitely consider legalization -- or, at the absolute least, decriminalization -- of cannabis one of the absolute best things that could happen to the US in regards to our justice system. Just about anything that helps put the screws to the domestic monstrosity that's been the "war" on drugs is a good thing, really. And given that marijuana is, at worst, no worse than alcohol, we don't have a significant reason to not legalize it.
Secondary considerations like robbing the southern cartels of a significant income, as well as bringing in extra tax money, providing jobs, and the whole host of things that would arise from a legal domestic cannabis industry just make it even more attractive. It's one of those things that have an entire host of good sides and incredibly few bad ones, honestly.
Fortunately, the tide in the states is turning towards it. If trends continue, there's pretty good chances we'll see either full or near full legalization across the country before I kick the bucket, which is nice. A bit of hypocrisy corrected and a great deal of social injustice averted... bonuses all around.
Secondary considerations like robbing the southern cartels of a significant income, as well as bringing in extra tax money, providing jobs, and the whole host of things that would arise from a legal domestic cannabis industry just make it even more attractive. It's one of those things that have an entire host of good sides and incredibly few bad ones, honestly.
Fortunately, the tide in the states is turning towards it. If trends continue, there's pretty good chances we'll see either full or near full legalization across the country before I kick the bucket, which is nice. A bit of hypocrisy corrected and a great deal of social injustice averted... bonuses all around.
16388
General Discussion / Re: Bay12 Election Night Watch Party
« on: November 22, 2014, 09:31:35 pm »
Ah, 2014-2016, also known as "The Years in Which the President Vetoed Everything". How fun.
Well, assuming it gets through the senate, anyway. It's going to be a very repetitive next couple of years.
Well, assuming it gets through the senate, anyway. It's going to be a very repetitive next couple of years.
16389
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you RRRRRRAAAAGGGGEEEE today: Super fuckin' eloquent Edition
« on: November 22, 2014, 12:08:48 pm »
... more blankets? It's not even cold where I'm at, but I still have three for casual heat regulation, impromptu blindfolds, and foot prop/pillows. Not even counting the couple that's covering the bed, since it's easier to sleep on top and bring more blankets than actually unmake the bed.
16390
General Discussion / Re: Sheb's European Politics Megathread
« on: November 22, 2014, 11:36:43 am »
... I'm pretty sure the west's general population, at the least, wouldn't care who was in charge so long as they stop invading other countries. That's all that's actually wanted, y'know? I guess they'd be supportive of a regime change to someone more sympathetic to western countries if that's what it took, but I'm pretty sure just about anyone would be fine so long as they'd knock the latest round of belligerent monkeying about off.
And yes, something something the other countries do it to and we'd also really bloody like them to stop, too.
And yes, something something the other countries do it to and we'd also really bloody like them to stop, too.
16391
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you RRRRRRAAAAGGGGEEEE today: Super fuckin' eloquent Edition
« on: November 22, 2014, 04:22:53 am »
... if y'all are really doing the tabs thing for the nth time, you can give the forum a search for the other dozen times it's come up. Think the latest one before this was in the WTF thread? Seriously, if you're wondering why various people approach tabs in various ways, it's been brought up several times. The answers lay in forum history.
Now excuse frumple while frumple goes back to managing a couple hundred tabs. I actually tidied up fifty or so just recently...
Though @ Leo, that's actually an interesting idea. Mildly (and deniably) misspell your name when you do paperwork, so you can track who's sold your info to who.
Now excuse frumple while frumple goes back to managing a couple hundred tabs. I actually tidied up fifty or so just recently...
Though @ Leo, that's actually an interesting idea. Mildly (and deniably) misspell your name when you do paperwork, so you can track who's sold your info to who.
16392
Other Games / Re: Dota 2 - Oracle is here! Also more events and hats for PA
« on: November 21, 2014, 10:33:07 pm »
Or aren't capable of just checking the picture's name. Hard to get more explicit than Monkey_King_Bar_icon.png.
16393
General Discussion / Re: I like anime, do you like anime?
« on: November 21, 2014, 09:03:32 pm »
... no, no, I could see a few situations where that line could come up and still be a fairly good reason to investigate a piece of writing. If a character was drunk out of their mind and screaming it in the middle the street, ferex. Something absurd along the lines of hentai kamen, yeah?
E: I could also see it come up pretty comfortably in, say, Toriko.
E: I could also see it come up pretty comfortably in, say, Toriko.
16394
General Discussion / Re: I like anime, do you like anime?
« on: November 21, 2014, 07:57:52 pm »
... yeah, pretty much. I burnt out on an LP at some point, iirc. The secondary stuff has better organized entertainment and less sub-par porn. Advantage: Not the VN.
16395
General Discussion / Re: Bay12 Election Night Watch Party
« on: November 21, 2014, 07:49:16 pm »
... of course those don't necessitate infinite growth. It's not a necessary thing in the vast majority of situations. It's not a minimum-needs thing, it's a +1. Desirable, but incredibly rarely needed to actually accomplish whatever goals you might have.
As for it not meaning they want more stuff... maybe not necessarily, but if it's hard to figure out that positive change and variety (even if in limited areas) don't entail more stuff, I'm not really sure how to better frame the discussion to elucidate. Change is generally going to mean new stuff, even if not necessarily a net increase in total stuff owned, and variety is almost certainly going to mean either new stuff or more stuff. Either way, even if you're not looking at a total increase in personally owned stuff, you're definitely looking at a total increase in societal-level stuff. If your population is growing or stuff-supply deteriorating, that means more stuff. And digital media definitely takes up more resources than you're giving it credit, methinks. It's cheaper than physical media, usually, but it's still by no means inexpensive or an example of resource paucity, from what I understand.
... that said, at least from what I've seen on the ground you're definitely rather extremely anomalous, SG. Most people I've met actually kinda' do want that massive garage with cars for every occasion, and various equivalent things. The extent they "don't care" is actually equivalent to the extent they can't figure out how to get it, not a lack of desire. It's incredibly easy to get locked into that cycle of "More stuff == more better" when you have the resources to do so -- more cars, more clothes, more houses, more whatever.
As for it not meaning they want more stuff... maybe not necessarily, but if it's hard to figure out that positive change and variety (even if in limited areas) don't entail more stuff, I'm not really sure how to better frame the discussion to elucidate. Change is generally going to mean new stuff, even if not necessarily a net increase in total stuff owned, and variety is almost certainly going to mean either new stuff or more stuff. Either way, even if you're not looking at a total increase in personally owned stuff, you're definitely looking at a total increase in societal-level stuff. If your population is growing or stuff-supply deteriorating, that means more stuff. And digital media definitely takes up more resources than you're giving it credit, methinks. It's cheaper than physical media, usually, but it's still by no means inexpensive or an example of resource paucity, from what I understand.
... that said, at least from what I've seen on the ground you're definitely rather extremely anomalous, SG. Most people I've met actually kinda' do want that massive garage with cars for every occasion, and various equivalent things. The extent they "don't care" is actually equivalent to the extent they can't figure out how to get it, not a lack of desire. It's incredibly easy to get locked into that cycle of "More stuff == more better" when you have the resources to do so -- more cars, more clothes, more houses, more whatever.