Walsingham

Good god.

Pulp Fiction = humour.

Interesting point there, GD. Of course losing 20000 staff would be a disaster. But surely it's simple to institute a frontline service badge, like you have para wings? (Not sure if you have the same system in the US) You can be in the Corps, but you aren't 'qualified' for the front line without passing key tests. TA now basically have to pass the same fitness tests as the regular Army here in the UK, since both serve side by side. Surely applying exactly the same standard of fairness. IMO, if you really want to get women accepted in the Army it's simple: have them pass a _harder_ phys test than normal. Not that the equality brigade would ever get their heads around that.

Don't take this the wrong way guys but 99% of you never served in the military. And unless I'm wrong, Gfted1 and I are the only ones on this board regularly who have ever served in combat. You just don't fully understand what you are talking about. I do not say that to be confrontational or nasty, it's just how it is. No offence taken, mate. Although I don't recall ever saying that women shouldn't be judged by the same grounds. If they can't complete the PFT for the corps or regiment then happy days. To take an argument which I've certainly not come across before thinking of it just now, what about people from poor backgrounds? Bear with me. In my experience in training fellahs from disadvantaged backgrounds make excellent soldiers. They also tend to stick with the Army for longer, making a career out of it, which saves money and promotes stability in units. We could speculate as to why, but it's not important. Suppose this is true. Do we refuse to allow chaps in from middle and upper class backgrounds? Of course we don't. We shove em all into uniform and test the crap out of them. We don't say , "Oh, but Tarquin isn't very physical but he has a degree so give him an easier test." EDIT: The key point here is that talking about average performance for given backgrounds is pointless. We have basic selection and training for a reason. Simply let it do its job.

Interesting notion. I might be able to find someone who looks like you, though. I'm probably a bit fat. Unless this was your angle on arrival. "I thought you were English European!" "Oh. Weightwatchers, you know. Side-effects etc."

*Quietly notes his name and IP for later processing*

Are you kidding? I'm all over mammoth burgers.

That's pretty much the definition I was expecting. But with due respect you sound like a bunch of bootnecks. I wouldn't say this if I didn't think you'd agree with me because I know about war like I know about sex in zero gravity. Well, maybe I read about the former a bit more... but I digress. I think if we've learned something in the last fifty years it is that warfighting isn't some Medal of Honour gun festival. There's a lot more to winning the operational objectives in a campaign than stabbing people. Particularly, but not only in counter-insurgency. I'd go so far as to suggest that an excellent corporal or sergeant, even, is going to have other skills than chucking grenades. Relating to others, commitment to a team, honesty... what is it again? Selflessness, Respect for Others, Loyalty, Integrity, Discipline, Courage. And none of those things are measured out by the container size. I have a further point, but don't want to hit tldr.

I think you're being a bit hard on yourself mate. Sometimes being down is the best thing to do. No sense pretending everything's lala if it isn't. Just so long as you don't stay down.

Speaking as a guy who hates all the copy protection bull I have to put up with, I nonetheless must call equal bull on the notion that rewards for pre-order = punishment for normals. How is it in any way unfair for a company to be grateful for a preorder, with all the massive benefits associated with preorders, to give something extra as a thank you? Does that mean if I send some muffins to a client who's been loyal then I'm punishing all the others? Or punishing most of my relatives if I give my brother a big christmas gift?

I'd like to point out that it's only because of Bethesda letting Obs make New Vegas that I'm even considering buying anything from this franchise.

There's been talk for two pages now about compromising combat effectiveness. Anyone care to tell me what the f*** that actually means?

ROFL. I know you didn't pick things at random, but it happens I know three guys who could answer all of those topics, and one of them could do all three!

One question, just occured to me: If the pen is mightier than the sword, then why are we so blase about what people write? ~~@Numbers Come on, Numbers. Either I'm right or the standard of academic discourse these days is irretrievably in the toilet. I'd say that wiki has slightly more credibility online than off it. I use wiki, but only in the same way that if I was interested in something I'd bring it up in conversation in the pub. I get a nice simple digestion of the common man's understanding. But no more. Speaking of the editing controls, I notice that Mr Wales went to the press this week to say he wants to make much much wiki easier to edit. Which is surely going to dilute it even further with the kind of hate filled garbage one finds on almost every 'speak your brains' news outlet.

I'm merely a little discontent with the economic realities of charity. If the supply price rise then the product price rises and the people who profit from it continue to do so. I simply don't see them investing as a company, money on a relief effort. As charities and private individuals, yes. My point is that there is a limit to how much they invest and its carefully delineated which defeat the whole concept of charity. You're saying that if the price of the production of the material rises, and the retail price rises, then the person retailing makes more money? They'd only do so if they took a percentage which isn't how an economy works*. Merely how politicians think. As I get older I'm increasingly baffled by the notion of charity as some sort of saintly activity. Almost as if it's become the atheist path to enlightenment. Why IN THE NAME OF F*** does charity have to be totally disinterested? The poor c*** at the other end doesn't give a toss if his goat was given without a shred of self interest. Not if he's really in trouble anyway. And if he isn't why give to him in a totally disinterested way in the first place? BTW, apologies for my language, but I'm still suffering the after-effects of debugging Securom in my installation of GTA IV this week. *To the best of my knowledge.

Amateurish? I like studios who try to do things differently. You have to accept that curveballs sometimes go wide.

:lol: The simple fact is that Oblivion had bugger all story, goblins which secretly leveled up along side the player in some mad training montage system (which I'd have liked to at least see), and an ending so banal I can't even remember what it was. I think I killed a dragon, or perhaps a man with a dragon on his head. The reasons for doing this had something to do with the hellgates in Buffy. I am also completely unable to remember anything AT ALL about a single character besides there was a king who was voiced by Patrick Stuart ...very briefly. So I'm not looking forward to it, and I'm not buying the ****ing thing until it is either on a 50% sale or I get a written apology from Bethesda.

I fixed the problems I had been having with Steam GTA IV. Applied Steam fix as listed I their tech help, then removed administrator rights from the game launcher. This worked by forcing the launcher AND THE SUBSYSTEMs to seek permission to run, which otherwise fouled securom. I hate securom more than ever now. Wasted nearly two ****ing hours on that pile of **** to use a game everyone's already pirated. By the time I got to play the game I was swearing and filled with rage. So it's true what the pundits sy about GTA, just for totally different reasons!

You are forgetting that the people who run the world are either morons or heartless ****s. I'm not saying I know the people who run teh world. But I've met and worked with some pretty senior guys. I wouldn't have called them either stupid or heartless. Confused, possibly. Subject to an incomprehensible array of stakeholders, certainly. Dealing with life and death with no option reading 'phone a friend', yes. I''m not saying there aren't some gold plated fethwits in power. I'm just saying that if you say that everyone is power is an evil prick you're being a bit ignorant and failing to grasp the problem. Which either means you don't want to solve the problem because it's more comfy believing something simple, or you can't get your head around it.

Freon wipes? Ouchie.

I've been trying to work out what Rosbif thought NSFW meant, and the only thing I can come up with is New South ****ing Wales. Which must have been confusing.

Nice to se someone taking on Sand's second order of complication mantle. The longer Australia is in trouble, the higher the price of coal becomes. The higher the price of coal, the higher the price of electricity. The higher the price of electricity, the higher the price of just about everything.

Pm the subject of cultural mesging, I was immensely disturbed to read the following articles today: 3rd of Japanese men no interested in sex Pashtun paedophilia "celebrated in song and dance"

Ring a ding, baby. Sorry, I just love saying that.

Alright, I admit there were some cool bits in Morrowind. Those dust storms were awesome touches. The way everyone's arms came up to shield their faces. Felt relieved to get indoors a lot of the time. And there were one or two halfway decent characters. But that does not a good game make. Hopefully they'll learn from the success of Vegas.