SteveThaiBinh

I like Jedi who admit the possibility that they could be wrong, particularly since they so often are. I think Kavar and Zez Kai-ell did this, don't think any of the others did. I agree that Vrook was probably a secret agent working for the Sith.

Hasn't that already happened? US TV series are written by large teams of writers, so presumably Lucas would delegate some tasks like, oh, let me see, maybe the dialogue, to someone else. Or better still, act only as producer.

Anime rocks! Never seen Naruto, though.

Yes, and the less said the better. :ph34r: Isn't Lucas working on a TV series of Star Wars? Haven't heard anything about that in a long long time.

I always wondered what the Bioware forums were for.

I was actually thinking of an episode of Star Trek.

It would make sense to do this shortly before they release the first bits of news about PNJ - the title and publisher would be nice, I suppose. I don't think that what we've seen looks co-ordinated, though. Maybe QA have identified such a mountain of bugs that they've been told to hold off until the devs can catch up. [/groundless pessimism]

Ask a mod. Nope. Not at all, definitely no flightlessness there. Have you never seen the full swoop? Yes. Crab sandwiches are much the better way of enjoy crab. Regular boiled crab, you spend far too much time picking it out of the shell for too little reward. Midnight Rabbit Lovers? You mean the forum guidelines? Who hasn't? A guaranteed method of causing alien computers to crash.

Debates come in many shapes and forms, that's true. I've also changed my mind and the minds of others in debates, but I've participated in debates where reasonable and open-minded people seemed to be driven to retrenchment and polarisation by the debate itself. The confrontational aspect inherent in some debate formats encourages participants to score points off the other side, with the moderates in the centre either silenced or pushed into choosing sides neither of which they feel happy with. I'm not saying this always happens, I'm saying it's one of the forces at work in debates, and one that can be partially overcome by a problem-solving format. I also don't accept that this is just closed-minded people being closed-minded - though there's some of that as well. Debates and discussion with the aim of solving a specific problem are successful at doing so, as opposed to debates for their own sake. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

I'm guessing you've been beta-testing?

Debates often become polarised, because that's the nature of the activity. There's little reason to listen to your opponent and no reason to change your opinion. Problem-solving activities are more productive in bring out people's inner moderate. Sit a group of left- and right-wingers, and people without political views, and tell them to produce a plan to do something (reform the judicial system, for example), and they will debate and discuss and eventually come up with something that's rather good and that nearly all of them can agree. If there is pressure for an agreement, people will compromise.

Galactic Civilizations 2 Out very soon. The earlier GalCiv is also definitely worth picking up.

Deekin?

It is, and I think it represents one path for video games to become more 'respectable' or 'respected' as an art form - better writing and the tackling of more complex themes. Yet the other path, greater interactivity, is potentially more exciting. Who knows what games will play like in ten years time?

I believe (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love God, and the second was to love thy neighbour. It's not so hard to see that Christians consider this to overrule stoning adulteresses and so on. Mohammed also preached tolerance and respect. Perhaps Muslims consider these commandments as overruling summary executions and wife-beating? Mohammed was a warrior, and Jesus was not, that is true. But can you truly say that Christian Europe has been less violent over the course of its history than the Muslim world? If Islam were a violent religion inspired by a violent prophet, and Christianity a peaceful religion inspired by a peaceful prophet, you would expect a clear difference between them.

I think the definition of music probably had to expand a little to include rap, but expand it has. The best rap is essentially performance poetry, and qualifies as art in my book.

I haven't yet played a computer game that I considered to be 'great art', or 'high art', with the complexity and originality that would entail. The medium may have the potential to produce works of great art, but that will take time - decades, I suppose. Are games examples of 'craft', then? Chippendale and Stradivarius are usually considered fine artisans rather than artists. Games have been, up to now, well-crafted products with genuine creativity behind them, but without the kind of artistic vision they would need to be considered as works of art. A few have pushed higher than this, though - suggesting there is the potential to go further. I hope they succeed.

It is wrong, and there are no excuses. Trying to understand or explain something is not the same as trying to justify or excuse it. It's important not to cross the line and use language that even appears to justify or excuse violent action. On the other hand, it's also important to seek to understand the problem if we want to do something about it.

Not for me, he didn't. My Exile just was not ready to face him. I still sometimes find that my character is seriously out of balance with him and have to hide behind the bushes to recuperate. The answer for the first playthrough would be the twin Twilek assassins (vs. Atton), because I hadn't prepared Atton to do anything except act as support for me. Never made that mistake again, though. Every other time was Vrook, when I was DS. And sometimes when LS, too. :D

Was the Microsoft ad (was that really 11 years ago? ) the full unexpurgated version? It doesn't seem likely, but I honestly can't remember. Interesting, but I guess it's consistent with the outcome of the Janet Jackson thing, i.e. that mainstream channels in primetime slots can't show anything sexually explicit. The NFL want the glamour of the rock star without the excess and amorality that goes along with it, but companies, organisation and politicians have always done the same. If they had allowed the lyrics to be broadcast, there would have been complaints, the whole policy would be up in the air again and confusion would reign. It makes sense that they were censored. Presumably they knew and agreed to it?

If the violent protesters were protesting to prove that Muslims aren't violent, there would have been irony. But they weren't, as I wrote above. You've misunderstood why both moderates and extremists were protesting. I'd suggest you reflect on the implications of perceiving irony where you claim to, but I certainly don't intend to debate with you if you insult me.

I watched Shaznay Lewis in Bend It Like Beckham last night. She's OK as an actress (good enough for soaps, at least), yet I don't remember seeing her in anything else. Singing Daleks: an idea whose time has come.

As far as I know, it got through, but in the form amended by the House of Lords removing the idea that someone can be prosecuted if they use 'reckless' language, even without intent to incite hatred. If they got the original through, let me know, I shall write to my MP. Link?

OK. If 43% of the population are living in absolute poverty, then that, not GDP growth, is the most important characterstic of the Kazakh economy. Unless the government has a plan to make all these oil deals and other investments have some impact on poverty, they're irrelevant. Have you taken a look at the government's Poverty Reduction Strategy? How well thought out is it? Yes, except that didn't really work out so well for Nigeria. One (among many) causes of social unrest there is a perception that the wealth of the country is being sold abroad without benefit to the people. Let us know what mark you get.

And many more do not, and many work to avoid violence, even standing in front of the extremists and trying to defuse the situation. Should these people be dismissed simply because the media has to focus on the extremists? Are we saying that it's understandable if a non-Muslim viewer comes away from this with the impression that 'Muslims are violent', and if so, is that the fault of the extremists, the moderate Muslims, the media or the viewer?