kgambit

A couple of articles worth reading: By HAMZA HENDAWI — Jun. 26 http://bigstory.ap.org/article/center-egypt-protest-morsis-legitimacy July 6, 2013 by Ed Morrissey http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/06/why-did-democracy-fail-in-egypt-but-succeed-in-tunisia/ and a couple of others on Tunisia and Egypt: http://www.dw.de/political-deadlock-continues-in-tunisia/a-17008632 http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/why-egyptians-are-so-unhappy-with-morsi-in-one-chart/277511/ The main difference between Egypt and Tunisia is the electoral mandate: Tunisia has had a long history and experience of organized political opposition leading up to the 2011 elections. As a result, Ennahda (the Muslim Brotherhood party) won 37% of vote and had to form a coalition government with secular and conservative parties. The reality on the ground in Tunisia forced the Islamists to work with other parties in order to survive. The recent assassinations of prominent secular opposition leader Chokri Belaid, (prominent critic of the Ennahda party) and Mohammed Brahmi, the leader of the People's Movement party (a secular and arab nationalist party) by a radical islamist have inflamed the country. Both assassinateions were blamed on the Ennahda. In Egypt however organized political opposition was virtually non-existent with the singular exception of the Muslim Brotherhood. Unlike Tunisia, Mursi was able to win a clear albeit slim majority of 51.7% of voters. The problem is that Mursi proved to be an Islamofascist who almost immediately attempted to install his own agenda which far exceeded his electoral mandate. In both cases, the issue of Shariah law in the respective constitutions is somewhat moot as the pre-2011 versions of the Tunisian and Egyptian constiutions already contained numerous references to Shariah law. According to a poll conducted on the 100th day in office of Egyptian President Muhammed Mursi, his approval rating has plummeted to 42% http://voiceofrussia.com/2012_10_08/Mursi-s-approval-rating-plummets/ By June 2013 it was 28% (down from a 77% high in 2012). apologies for the wall of text .....

I stand corrected. That's probably an indication of how little time I spend on BSN these days. As you said, the alleged BSN post appears to be fake.

Those features only appear if you are logged in to the BSN. If you view the forums without logging in they don't appear. The lack of a thread title might because the "alleged" Gaider post appeared too far down in the thread. It's absence does not disprove the authenticity. I couldn't find it on google either. Here's the link to where it appears: http://www.reddit.com/r/dragonage/comments/1kfz0j/devs_confirmyour_choices_dont_matter_and_in_some/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/video-hamas-video-purports-to-show-rockets-fired-into-israel/article5404218/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsejC-8N9tc It definitely looks like some of those rockets come from MLRS to me.

Sounds like Reds 2 and Pacific Rim will end up as 1$ Tuesday 2-day video rentals at the local video store to me.

Finished The Outpost by Jake Tapper. Based on the assault by Afghan Insurgents at Combat Outpost Keating in Kamdesh, Afghanistan in 2009 and the events leading up to it. It's exceptionally well written and Tapper doesn't pull any punches in it. and started this one: The Gilded Rune by Lisa Smedman

Solomon Kane Great cast with James Purefoy, Max von Sydow, Alice Krige, Rachel Hurd-Wood, Pete Postlethwaite 16th century anti-hero created by Robert E. Howard (creator of Conan the Barbarian) Movie just never totally clicks for me 6.5/10

It seems he wasn't on the street at all. Reportedly, Scheppers, reliever Joe Nathan and catcher A.J. Pierzynski were all at Panini’s Bar in downtown Cleveland when Scheppers instigated the fight around 2:30 a.m., according to the Dallas Morning News. http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/28/witness-says-tanner-scheppers-lost-a-bar-fight/ Btw, Scheppers is 6'4" and 220# and he got whipped ..... lol

Tomas aka Ashen_Shugar the Velheru plays a important role in Magician's End. I thought the Rift war saga (Magician, Silverthorn and Darkness at Sethanon) was his best work by far, with the Serpeantwar saga a close second. There is a lot of reading between the RIft War saga and the Chaos War Saga: Rift War Saga (Magician, Silverthorn and Darkness at Sethanon) Legends of the RIftwar trilogy (Jimmy the Hand, Honoured Enemy and Murder in La Mut fit chronologically with Magician in the Riftwar Saga but I read them long after the first series) The Empire Trilogy (Daughter of the Empire starts during Magician but it's almost a totally separate series with a couple of characters from the Riftwar saga crossing over.) Riftwar Legacy (Krondor the Betrayal starts after Servant of the Empire and Krondor the Assassins and Krondor Tears of the Gods follows Mistress of the Empire) Krondor's Sons (Prince of the Blood and The King's Buccaneer) Serpeantwar Saga (4 books) Conclaves of the Shadow trilogy Darkwar Saga trilogy Demonwar Saga (Rides a Dread Legion and At the Gates of Darkness) Chaoswar Saga trilogy http://www.crydee.com/raymond-feist/reading-order/chronological I think I have an extra paperback copy of Honoured Enemy from Legends of the Riftwar. I still have hardbound editions starting with Darkwar saga thru Chaoswar saga plus paperbacks of the Conclaves of the Shadow and Legends of the RIftwar but my original copies of the Riftwar saga, Serpeantwar Saga, Krondor's Sons and Empire Trilogy were all destroyed in a flood.

A good and worthwhile list, Magicians End would be my favourite Magician's End was my favorite as well. It's a good read but it's tough to see the series come to an end. It is the final book in both the Chaos War saga and the grand finale to the entire Rift War Cycle (which started in 1982!). Not sure if Feist has anything further planned for Midkemia or not. He certainly left himself some wiggle room at the end.

Without any attempt to prejudge the case, I simply offer the following information: Pertinent laws under Louisana's Castle Doctrine RS 14:19 http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78336 §19. Use of force or violence in defense A. The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable when committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense, and that this Section shall not apply where the force or violence results in a homicide. B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur: (1) The person against whom the force or violence was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle. (2) The person who used force or violence knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred. C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using force or violence as provided for in this Section and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force. D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used force or violence in defense of his person or property had a reasonable belief that force or violence was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible offense or to prevent the unlawful entry. Acts 2006, No. 141, §1. RS 14:20 http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78338 §20. Justifiable homicide A. A homicide is justifiable: (1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger. (2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing. (3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle. (4)(a) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle. (b) The provisions of this Paragraph shall not apply when the person committing the homicide is engaged, at the time of the homicide, in the acquisition of, the distribution of, or possession of, with intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance in violation of the provisions of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law. B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur: (1) The person against whom deadly force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle. (2) The person who used deadly force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred. C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using deadly force as provided for in this Section, and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force. D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used deadly force had a reasonable belief that deadly force was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a violent or forcible felony involving life or great bodily harm or to prevent the unlawful entry. Added by Acts 1976, No. 655, §1. Amended by Acts 1977, No. 392, §1; Acts 1983, No. 234, §1; Acts 1993, No. 516, §1; Acts 1997, No. 1378, §1; Acts 2003, No. 660, §1; Acts 2006, No. 141, §1. RS 9:2800.19 http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=408383 §2800.19. Limitation of liability for use of force in defense of certain crimes A. A person who uses reasonable and apparently necessary or deadly force or violence for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or his property in accordance with R.S. 14:19 or 20 is immune from civil action for the use of reasonable and apparently necessary or deadly force or violence. B. The court shall award reasonable attorney fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses to the defendant in any civil action if the court finds that the defendant is immune from suit in accordance with Subsection A of this Section. Acts 2006, No. 786, §1.

Recently finished these: American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History by Chris Kyle et al Viper Pilot: A Memoir of Air Combat (Wild Weasel missions from 1986 to 2006) by Dan Hampton Magician's End by Raymond Feist and just started this: The Outpost: An Untold Story of American Valor by Jake Tapper (the story of Combat Outpost Keating - Afghanistan 2009)

Any idea how long? Thought I heard something like 10 to 15 hours.

First head to roll: Ryan Braun suspended for rest of season (65 games) without pay. Braun's suspension falls under the commissioner's powers of discipline for "just cause" rather than the JDA, which relates to failed drug tests. Braun did not appeal the suspension and will begin serving it immediately. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb/news/20130722/ryan-braun-biogenesis-mlb-suspension/?sct=hp_t11_a7&eref=sihp

Just started watching American Horror Story (season 1 on DVD). Creepiest TV show I've seen in a very, very long time. Jessica Lange is awesome but the entire cast is good.

You're welcome. 1) I'm skeptical of a 200# draw weight longbow as a routine occurrence, especially since that's the current world record. Mark Stretton (UK) drew a longbow weighing 90 kg (200 lb) to the maximum draw on an arrow of 82.5 cm (32 ½ in) at the shooting grounds of The Bath Archers, Somerset, UK on 15 August 2004. 2) Not sure if I understand your point. Can you elaborate? 3) Ah and there is the rub! What is a "normal" longbow? Is a 75# draw weight normal? 110#? 150#? Are the longbows of the Mary Rose typical or they the best of the best? just for grins, ere's a summary of everything that impacts the physics of the problem: a) draw weight of the bow b) efficiency of the bow c) length of the arrow and draw length d) mass of the arrow and mass of the bow e) type of arrow head - different arrow heads had vastly different penetrating power f) type of fletching - affects accuracy and flight characteristics g) hardness of arrow head (medieval metallurgy 101) - surprisingly important since unhardened metal heads could deform instead of penetrating h) type of armor i) hardness of armor (medieval metallurgy 101) - is the armor uniform in quality, or not? how was it forged and tempered j) construction of armor (interior padding etc) k) thickness of armor at point of impact l) angle of impact (relative to the target) m) range to the target - energy loss due to drag n) target speed and direction of motion (relative velocity is important and can increase the effective impact energy by 60%+) o) wind velocity and direction - can increase or reduce drag p) construction of the arrow (how is the head fastened to the shaft? yeah the type of glue matters - who knew? q) construction of the bowstring (!) seriously this one floored me and probably a couple of other things that I missed. Now the colored topics represent at least some of the areas where various researchers disagree - sometimes by a lot, sometimes by a little I saw a quote which I will repeat here which I think sums up the issue nicely: PS: Apologies for the two posts back to back. I simply couldn't answer Jarmo and Diagoras in one post.

I had several links in my previous post but I've included one more source. (Apologies for the ensuing wall of text) Read "A Report of the Findings of the Defence Academy Warbow Trials, part 1 2005" by Paul Bourke and David Whetham (google the title and you should be able to find a downloadable pdf version) Plus there was the Bane paper I previously linked and Williams and Jones tests referenced in that and the Bourke and Whetham paper. Hall and Eltis predate that work so I hardly consider their views contemporary. Hall and Kelly deVries co-authored at least one book and deVries is a rabid unyielding advocate that medieval long bow draw weights are much lower than most modern researchers think. At the end of Paul Bourke and David Whetham's paper. there is an exchange between the authors and deVries. DeVries questions the longbow draw weights used by Bourke and Whetham and this is their reply: All of the authors mentioned (Strickland, Hardy, Soar and Holmes) and Williams and Jones are repeatedly referenced in all of the sources I can find including Banes paper. And Bourke et al had one final reply to deVries comments on the article : ouch ......... In fact, it's far more enlightening to read the back and forth discourse at the end of the paper. DeVries and Bourke et all simply do not see eye to eye on the validity of the previous testing or in each others assumptions let alone the conclusions that are drawn. I don't know who is right but it certainly doesn't sound like the issue is closed to me, and I'm sorry but I'm not seeing the consensus that you claim exists. For what it's worth I decided to dig a little bit on what various people claim are the actual draw weights of the English longbow and in particular the draw weights for the Mary Rose longbows. This is a sampling of what I found: I believe that deVries et al argue for a 65 to 75 # draw weight. The draw weight of a long bow is one of the primary factors in determining the energy of impact. If authors can't agree on that, then the issue is clearly not settled. and I'll finish with this quote and one video just for fun: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCE40J93m5c

Or her kids witnessed the crime and told her about it.

5mm? I doubt it seriously if for no other reason than weight. (If you have links to support the 5mm figure I would love to see them) Most plate armor is comparable to modern 18 gauge (0.0516") galvanized steel which is ~1.3 mm or possibly 16 gauge (0.0635 ") which is 25% thicker or ~1.6 mm. 18 gauge galvanized steel weighs 2.156 pounds per square foot, 16 gauge @ 2.656 pounds and the human body averages about 1.9 sq m surface area (or ~20.5 sq ft). Most period pieces of full plate weight around 45 pounds which is pretty well in line with a 16 / 18 gauge galvanized steel suit. (Check out the SCA forums and you'll see that is what they recommend as an analog). At 5 mm maximum thickness, your armor would weigh ~ 135 pounds or more. That's unmanageable for use in combat. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/07/15/rspb.2011.0816 Armor was not uniformly thick either. The helm had some the thickest armor typically up to 3mm, closely followed by the centre-line of the breastplate, which could be of similar thickness. The breastplate would often then be thinned off towards the sides of the plate, where it was less likely to be hit hard, so would be perhaps 1mm thick on the side. the knee and elbow cups (called poleyn and couters respectively) would be next thickest, at about 1.5 - 2mm thick. Lastly, shoulder, arm, leg and foot defenses would be made of thin metal, from 1.5mm thick down as thin as 0.75mm thick. Actual breastplates from the 1470s had armor about 2.03 mm thick at their thickest point, with greaves etc, being correspondingly thinner. Some sources quote the weight of a full suit of plate at field armour at closer to 30 kg by the end of the 17th century. Specialized jousting combat armor may have weighed as much as 50 kilos but it was a specialized set of armor not intended for normal combat. As for armor penetration, I'll simply post this link: http://www.currentmiddleages.org/artsci/docs/Champ_Bane_Archery-Testing.pdf Edit: There is no consensus on the penetrating power of longbow arrows versus armor. Here's another article that questions some of Bane's conclusions. http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.com/2006/12/arrows-vs-armor-ca-1400.html Part of the problem is that the metallurgy of the period was highly variable. The amount of energy needed to penetrate even 1.5 mm of steel could vary anywhere from 40 to 120 joules simply depending on the quallty of the steel. And in The Knight and the Blast Furnace, Alan Williams found that almost 30% of the armor he studied from the 14th was simply wrought iron which lies on the low end of that 40 to 120 joule range. http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.com/2006/12/14th-c-armor-metallurgy.html

My first impression was that this is a modified version of the NWN2 crafting system with the addition of food and beverage "cooking recipes". It might be simpler but without the further knowledge of the types of skills, talent or abilities that some recipes might require it's hard to say. We might simply end up seeing reworked versions of the Craft Wands or Create Magical Arms or Armor feats. I'm curious if there will be a limit on the number of enchantments that can be placed on items. (Frankly I hope there are limits.) I wonder if "harvested souls" will somehow work their way into the PE crafting system as crafting ingredients (NWN2 "essences" anyone?).

I suggest those of you with a real interest in medieval sword fighting techniques read THIS: http://www.thearma.org/essays/armoredlongsword.html "Certain tactical basics became apparent early on. The edge of the sword, for example, is relatively useless against plate armour. Most source texts show no edge blows at all. Rather, armoured sword fighting is all about putting the point into a relatively unprotected area. In order to thrust effectively and accurately to these relatively small targets such as the face, armpit, inside of the elbow, and other areas which are not covered by plate armour, and defend them, half-swording is the predominant technique. Half-swording, with a firm grip closer to the point, gives one the thrusting accuracy to hit these relatively small areas. It also enables one to thrust with power and body weight behind the attack, often necessary in order to penetrate the maille and padded garments between the plate defenses. Grappling moves such as trips and throws are an essential element as well. Levering with the sword, arm and wrist locks, even kicks and hand strikes are all useful techniques against an armoured man. It is often necessary to throw your opponent to the ground and perhaps hold him there in order to make an opening for your finishing move."

Intelligence isn't just your existing knowledge. It also encompasses a wide range of learning and reasoning abilities such as your ability to learn, retain and recall knowledge; your ability to use existing knowledge for problem solving both quantitative and abstract; and the ability to read and write, and reading comprehension. It also reflects how efficiently you process information and the speed at which that process take place. (I would suggest looking up the CHC theory for more details.) Wisdom is more about using good judgment. It's not totally separate from intelligence because clearly your past knowledge and experiences play a critical role in the decisions you make. One definition says: "[wisdom is] the ability or result of an ability to think and act utilizing knowledge, experience, understanding, common sense, and insight". On the general topic of fixed or increasing stats, sign me up for increasing stats. Without more details on how the base attribute system is going to work, I won't even begin to speculate on what the proper rate of increase is.

Alternating between Witcher 2 and Mass Effect 2

I'm perfectly fine if you want to classify with what I wrote as something less than a full blown review. I'm not bothered by the semantics in the least. I would have replied sooner to the complaints but this was the first opportunity I have had to do so. As I admitted in the write-up, I did NOT have as much time to play the game as I wanted NOR did I get as far as I wanted. Unfortunately, my copy of the game arrived later that I had expected and I was already committed to house hunting trip starting on the 15th. That meant dropping the cats off at the vets that afternoon, packing, having the mail held, etc, then leaving the morning of the 16th and then returning on the 21st. Since waiting until the 21st would have rendered any review uselss as the game would have already been released, I opted to go with something less than I would have liked simply because I felt I owed the folks at Obsidian and Atari a review, and attempted to do the best job I could in the limited time I had available. Unfortunately, that left me barely a full 24 hours to play the game. Should I have opted to write nothing? In all honesty, I thought the answer to that was unmistakably NO. So I opted to write up my notes on that basis and stated that clearly in the write up. I simply couldn't answer some of the questions people had, such as: does the ending satisfy? do the characters interactions improve? do choices matter? I did run into several instances where some interesting choices were presented, but as to what the long term impact of those choices were is simply something I wasn't able to comment on. The one point I probably failed to make as fully as I should have is that the plot, as might be expected, does unfold more slowly than it does in MotB or the OC or even MoW. In those three titles it's clear from the beginning what your purpose is and what you need to do. In SoZ, things are different; you're in a strange new world and part of the fun of the open ended exploration that comes with the game means that for people who like to explore that things will see that plot evolve more slowly. There's also a certain fog that envelops what's going on in Samarach and it takes some time to discover exactly what is happening. I'm sorry if any of the furor over the "review" has distracted people from what I think is quite simply an exceptionally fun game to play (and is beautifully crafted to boot). My apologies to Tony Evans, Anthony Davis and the rest of the Soz team for not being able to do a more in depth review. Cheers, kgambit PS: Anthony, I actually did get to the point (and considerably) beyond where I could have initiated the trade system, but with a single skin avaiable for trade, I didn't feel like that was worth testing at that point.