SteveThaiBinh

It would make for a more peaceful world. :D Maybe they'll include it as an option in Civ IV? Nah, probably not.

An RPG would have been nice. Still, an FPS will sell well, and perhaps the franchise will then expand to include RPGs.

Why shouldn't building units cost one population the same as workers?

FPS.

Hey, you play your way and I'll play mine. All I need now is the Battlefield 2 Peace Protestor Expansion Pack. :D

Normal landmass. Too big and you get too many cities to manage (yawn), too small and everyone stops expanding and starts fighting too soon. I definitely prefer continents - the age of discovery with Navigation is always one of the highlights of the game for me.

He'll be back for guest appearances, I guess.

It's possible that if Baley's spam didn't exist, it would be impossible to post anything relevant on any topic at all. The very concept of relevance, or 'anti-spam', could not exist without spam to contrast with. Is it possible that Baley has already created his own world, and this is it?

I like it well enough. It has potential. It looks bad when compared with SG-1, but what doesn't?

So every time we post something relevant and meaningful, Baley spams to maintain the balance.

My sister was an Airwolf fan, and I believe still has a photo of the guy (the name escapes me) in her house somewhere. It's hard to remember anything that would be understood by non-Brits. I remember Knightmare, but now we're getting into the dangerous territory of children's TV. :ph34r:

They've just spent an entire season showing Carter adjusting to, and dealing successfully with, the pressures of command. And now they're going to take it away? I predict righteous fan anger. :angry:

Do you mind? I do not get my philosophical ideas from Sesame Street.:angry: I get them from Fraggle Rock.

... To bring it down, of course. Or rule it. Whichever comes first. Or both. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> @Meta: Shh! :angry: @ShadowPaladin: We are part of society because that is our nature, the nature with which we have evolved. As intelligent beings, we are capable of removing ourselves from society, but it will never be more than a small minority that does so. We are part of society in order to benefit ourselves and those around us, because we believe we cannot lead happy and fulfilled lives alone. Experience tells us that we can achieve more of our goals, both for ourselves and for others, by working together with others.

Is that the calling the a meretricious dribbler? "

Well done on restricting yourself to four s - I don't think I could have managed it. Any bets on which one has amnesia?

Sadist!

The world is like a mirror. When you smile, your friends will smile back.

Atlantis was more than meh but less than . I will happily give it another season, though. I thought the last season of SG1 was great - incredible strong, given that it was the eighth season.

No. Obsidian think the best approach to information management is that when you have nothing to say, say nothing. I don't think this is exactly orthodox in the public relations world, but there you go.

It seems to be true that some French and Russian politicians and businessmen profited personally from the Oil-for-Food programme and other deals. However, the French and Russian governments and people stopped supporting the sanctions long before, and for good reasons: the sanctions had a devastating effect on the civilians of Iraq; they were unjustified given that similar or worse regimes elsewhere were not subject to sanctions; they weren't destabilising the regime. Now, you can make strong arguments against this position, I agree. But the simplistic view that 'Oh, the French opposed the sanctions and the war because they were taking backhanders' is part of a worrying trend of anti-French hostility that's building in the US and UK and needs combatting now.

I don't entirely agree. While history books do include a lot of facts, these facts can be selected according to the bias of the author. It's possible to argue that even the most diligent author who tries to be wholly objective cannot avoid the biasing influences of her own cultural background. Recently, there was a huge row between China and Japan over Japanese school textbooks, in which the massacre of thousands at Nanjing was described as an 'incident'. That is undoubtedly true - but is it 'the truth'? Moreover, while history books contain facts, they mainly contain argument supported by evidence. Different historical interpretations are possible of the same events using the same facts. That's why history is an art, not a science. Azarkon, it's very interesting to read through your ideas. It looks like you're advocating an epistemological position that it's not possible to know the absolute truth of something, only to get some degree of understanding it by looking at it from several directions, all of which only give part of the whole picture. You might be taking a representationalist or idealist view, I'm not certain - or something else quite different (I struggle to understand all of this ). These are serious and widely-held views of the world, among philosophers and academics. Not everyone believes that the empirical approaches of the natural sciences work well when applied to understanding human behaviour.

Moving headquarters provides a plausible excuse for failing to release the patch. Does it actually stand up as a good reason, though?

Do you really think that would help?

Awwwwww :"> One of the sweetest romances in fantasy literature. I liked it too. :D