Jump to content

kgambit

Members
  • Posts

    218
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by kgambit

  1.  

     

    We as in the people reading the forum. Not sure what the family remark is about but oh well.

     

    Speak for yourself. You don't speak for me.

     

     

    He speaks for the collective.  You are we, we are you.  

     

     

    Resistance is futile.    All will  be assimilated.  

  2.  

     

    Door Kickers. A thing of beauty when a plan comes together.

     

    FINALLY got the last mission in Terror at Sea campaign.  Lost track of how many attempts it took.  Final time was glacier slow - 10:04 but no casualties! 

     

     

    The time I managed to beat it I made the mistake of sending a team down to the middle deck using the middle stairwell and they found themselves surrounded on 3 sides by the guys with vests and M4s. Thankfully liberal application of 5.7mm to the tune of 900 RPM got them out of that jam.

     

     

       

    I had 4 teams of 2 hit the middle deck simultaneously: one team on each of the northern and southern stairways and 2 teams on the stairway that ends in the dining room on the middle deck.  But I hit the opposing team outside of the dining room with the sniper fire first and then sent the good guys in.  The middle deck was the toughest.  Took me less than a minute to clear the engine deck and 2 minutes to clear the upper deck with a LOT of flash bangs and the rest of the time to clear the middle.  WHEW! 

     

    Just started The Cell.  First mission is a doozy.   :facepalm: But not nearly as bad as that last mission in Terror at Sea.  :biggrin:

     

     

     

    Lost the motivation to play Door Kickers after the multi-level maps appeared, in which it was impossible to create a one-go plan.

     

    True, but there aren't that many multi-level maps thankfully. 

  3. No compensation for SD! That's a jagged pill to swallow considering first round picks can make or break a franchise for years.

     

    Yep.  NBA is the same way and they don't offer compensatory picks for FA losses either.  MLB offers compensatory picks for unsigned 1st or 2nd round selections and the NHL offers compensatory picks for any unsigned draft choice.   

  4. Rescind the offer and lower it...BRILLIANT!

     

    So what happens when he doesn't sign and re-enters the draft next year? Is San Diego just out of luck on that 1st round pick they spent on him or do they get an additional 1st round pick next year?

     

    The deadline for trading him has passed (Aug 9).

     

    The Chargers have until November 15th (Week 10) to sign him so he could play the remainder of the season.

     

    If that doesn't occur, they can still sign him before the end of the season but he can't play.  If THAT fails, they lose his rights completely with NO compensation and Bosa re-enters the 2017 draft.

    • Like 1
  5.  

    we do feel a bit sad for the numerous competitors that were likely precluded from participating in spite o' having never been part o' the ubiquitous and state-sponsored russian doping scheme. given the extent o' the cheating, russians were gonna get little benefit o' doubt. perhaps the blanket condemnation were deserved. dunno. few whistle-blowers came forward to expose russian cheats. and heck, one whistle-blower were nevertheless prevented from competing, which will no doubt discourage future athletes from calling attention to state-sponsored doping.  regardless, given how meaningful is the olympics in many sports, we nevertheless feel compassion for those innocent russians denied the world's largest and brightest stage.

     

    HA! Good Fun!

     

     

    Yep, hit the overs in both cases.

     

    I agree that Stepanova was treated badly.  The IOC's handling of her situation was ridiculous - especially since the IAAF had cleared her for competition and recommended to the IOC that she be allowed to compete.   Given that she had torn a heel ligament in July, it was unlikely she would have been 100% but it would have been a nice gesture.

  6.  

     

    ps is studies that suggest that the t-rex were predominant a scavenger.  and for all we know, it mighta' had a disposition akin to a week-old kitten.

     

     

     

    There are also studies that suggest T-Rex was primarily a predator and could not have survived as a scavenger. 

     

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/for-t-rex-scavenging-was-a-tough-gig-92901387/?no-ist

     

    (And the original source:   http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/278/1718/2682)

     

         Our results suggest that T. rex and other extremely large carnivorous dinosaurs would have been unable to compete as obligate scavengers and would have primarily hunted large vertebrate prey, similar to many large mammalian carnivores in modern-day ecosystems

     

     

    The full article has multiple sources which have links to studies supporting both sides fwiw, so you can draw your own conclusions.  There is physical evidence that T-Rex did attack live prey.

     

    http://www.livescience.com/38182-tyrannosaur-tooth-in-hadrosaur-tail.html    

     

    http://io9.gizmodo.com/finally-actual-physical-evidence-that-t-rex-was-a-pred-800092954

     

    Since this basically started over a line from a Schwarzenegger movie, aptly named Predator no less, I'll exit this derailed discussion the same way:

     

    Hasta la Vista baby .......

    • Like 1
  7.  

     

     

     

    Step up your game you slack-jawed faggots!

     

    what the hell

     

    why isn't that censored but so much else that is very arguably milder is

     

    'Cause Jessie Ventura said it and he's cool. Supposedly. I think he's a jackass but that's me.

     

     

    And a sexual tyrannosaurus.    :biggrin:  

     

     

    never understood that turn o' phrase.  

     

     

    maybe a reference to a predator?    who knows - it was from jesse ventura after all       ​ :biggrin:

     

    oh yeah, tax returns - Trump's not skating on those

  8.  

     

    Step up your game you slack-jawed faggots!

     

    what the hell

     

    why isn't that censored but so much else that is very arguably milder is

     

    'Cause Jessie Ventura said it and he's cool. Supposedly. I think he's a jackass but that's me.

     

     

    And a sexual tyrannosaurus.    :biggrin:  

    • Like 1
  9.  

    @GD: Johnson favors a tax system based on Consumer Spending right?

     

    Yes, a consumption tax like a national sales tax. Generally (at least in states I've lived in) it's applied to all non-essential (meaning not on grocery or medicine) purchases. Although he hasn't released specifics on how it would work or what would be exempt that I've seen.

     

    On advantage though, everyone will be paying taxes. Rich, poor, legal and illegal. Because there is no escaping it the over all burden may be less than the income tax. It would certainly cost a heck of a lot less to collect. Of course, he can't wave a wand and make this happen. He'd have to get Congress to buy in.

     

     

    It would really be nice if he had some more details on exactly how his NST proposal differs from any of the others or what gets included.    Frankly the IRS budget is a drop in the bucket of the US Federal budget.  :)

     

    PS:  He still might get my vote because I would rather have root canal than vote for Hillary .... or Trump.  

  10.  

     

    @GD: Johnson favors a tax system based on Consumer Spending right?

    Yes, a consumption tax like a national sales tax. Generally (at least in states I've lived in) it's applied to all non-essential (meaning not on grocery or medicine) purchases. Although he hasn't released specifics on how it would work or what would be exempt that I've seen.

     

    On advantage though, everyone will be paying taxes. Rich, poor, legal and illegal. Because there is no escaping it the over all burden may be less than the income tax. It would certainly cost a heck of a lot less to collect. Of course, he can't wave a wand and make this happen. He'd have to get Congress to buy in.

     

    Yes, let's shift all the tax burden on the poor people, since they spend 100% of their income, while the super-rich probably don't even spend 10%.

     

     

    Actually it's more like 50% but that doesn't adjust for how much of the percentage in each income group is actually essential spending which doesn't get taxed versus non-essential spending which is taxed.

     

    My problem is that even if you tax the entirety of US consumer spending (~70% of GDP or 11.5 T$) you need nearly a 40% tax rate to generate 4 Trillion $ to cover the federal budget.

  11. The US averaged ~101 total medals and 36 golds in the 7 post-boycott Olympics.  So 2016 is roughly on track to match that.   

     

    The US Team has done well with some great individual performances and a couple of disappointments from upsets. Which is how every Olympics plays out.  :biggrin:

     

    Edit:  FWIW, the over/under was 42.5 golds and 103.5 total.  

  12.  

    It's not about total population or how much the elite can earn. It begins with how many average people have access to sport infrastructure, trainers, good diets, school/college sports programs, local competition, etc.

     

    Sure some American athletes can be poor by American standards, but it's still incomparable to those African countries.

     

    Please.   The number of foreign athletes and eventual Olympic medalists that attend US colleges and universities on scholarships is far larger than you think.  

     

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303830204577448620436755502        (Unfortunate title for this article)

     

    http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/article/2016-07-28/2016-rio-olympics-ncaa-olympic-student-athletes-school

     

    There are 1,018 incoming, current and former NCAA student-athletes set to compete in the 2016 Summer Olympics in Brazil, representing 107 countries and 223 NCAA member institutions across all three divisions.

     

     

     

    I'm not sure where you're going with this. In order for a country to be accomplished in sports you need infrastructure across the country across multiple tiers. The fact that so many foreign participants got to where they are in America and not at home only proves the point.

     

    "The number of foreign athletes and eventual Olympic medalists that attend US colleges and universities on scholarships is far larger than you think."

     

    That sounds like a drop in a bucket in terms of what I'm talking about. The amount of people that can get to that level and get a US scholarship is still limited by the lack of training opportunities they have back home starting from the average kid in some remote town.

     

    It's not about how many people a country has but how many people in that country have access to facilities and a quality of life that's at least not big detriment to their growth. I though all this should be obvious.

     

     

       Any athlete has to demonstrate sufficient skill to be offered a scholarship (full or partial) at a US university.  That means foreign athletes have already demonstrated a proficiency level or the potential to raise their skill level to a standard comparable to comparable US athletes. That can't be done without some substantial infrastructure at least in some disciplines although it is more likely to come thru club competition.   More than 16,000 foreign athletes dotted NCAA rosters in 2006-7, nearly two-thirds of them in Division I and the number has steadily increased. 

     

       Among the top 25 women tennis  teams in Division I, approximately 40 percent of scholarships go to international players. The top 25 schools in Division II award roughly 70 percent of their scholarships to female players from abroad.   Track and field and swimming are comparable. Others sports are lower.

     

     

    @Malcador - Okay.  I wasn't aware that McLaren had offered any information beyond his original report but I could be wrong.    Decision should be coming soon.

  13. Banning that Russian lady on an allegation was odd.

     

    I thought she was originally allowed to compete based on having been tested outside of Russia since 2014 but was subsequently banned based on WADA's report by Richard McLaren and had filed an emergency appeal seeking reinstatement.  Or is there something else I'm missing.   I thought her appeal was still pending with a decision expected tonight? 

  14. Matt Kuchar at 18 - now one shot back of a 3-way tie for first.  Kuchar is 8 under par for the day.  Rose and Stenson tied at 14 under on 15. 

     

    Kuchar misses to finish at 13 under (Bronze likely).  Rose birdies 15 to go to 15 under and Stenson answers with a dart on 16 to set up a birdie putt to tie it AGAIN.  This is great stuff.

×
×
  • Create New...