Bartimaeus

aand that's #21 for phelps

and that's 20 golds for phelps

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/09/trump-gun-owners-clinton-judges-second-amendment "Trump hints at assassination of Hillary Clinton by gun rights supporters"

How do you figure? Everywhere I'm reading, it's a true crack, not a bypass.

It wasn't a crack - it was a bypass*, a bypass that is no longer functioning. However, Denuvo, the protection scheme that protects Doom and some other games that have been "unpiratable" over the past 6 months or so, was apparently just fully cracked. *A bypass is different from a crack, in that, essentially, it simply fools the DRM into thinking everything is as it should be...whereas a crack removes or disables the DRM in its entirety. Bypasses are not considered to be real cracks, and often have issues - refer to the Titan Quest piracy debacle, where some of the DRM protections were bypassed, but some were (unknowingly to the pirates) not, leading to a game that appeared to have performance issues and was super buggy, which then lead to it getting bad early reviews and press from pirates...but in reality, it was just part of the DRM scheme trying to do its job.

From everything I've read, it's the Chargers. Literally every other #3 pick since the implementation of the rookie wage scale has gotten what he's asking for (and sometimes more, and players drafted below #3 have gotten what he's asking for - and what he's asking for is either changing when he gets the money, or the offset language, which is perfectly standard for high 1st round picks). He's literally only asking for what all the other players in his position (and many below!) have gotten - I'm sorry, but that's all on the Chargers. Pay him what he wants or lose your #3 overall pick. In regards to a trade, I believe their ability to trade his signing rights ends either today or tomorrow (e: yep, ends on the 9th). After that, they only have the ability to sign him...and since he can afford to sit out (since his family is in decent financial straits), he seems pretty content to sit out this season so he can re-enter the draft next season. He'd still be drafted highly, particularly seeing as other teams know why a deal didn't get done to begin with. (e): For the record, Bosa is now the longest holding-out player since the new CBA/rookie wage scale was implemented.

The Bosa holdout is just ridiculous. Why does San Diego have to play hardball with rookie contract language that is totally standard for the 3rd pick of the draft? ...

Hmm, that doesn't seem right...

I also don't much care for the comparison between somebody who's not a president and somebody who is/was...the fact that you're already making the comparison BEFORE she's president is not a great sign of things to come... ...Of course, the other choice is still Trump...

Uh, never mind. Apparently, they burned the field or something, so it's been canceled.

https://twitter.com/NFL/status/762113210338058240 "I'm Gonna Ask Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson If I Can Play the First Series Tomorrow Night." -Brett Favre in HoF Induction Speech (yesterday)

FOOTBALL IS BACK, BABY. Uh, sort of.

How can you still be this upset about a post that wasn't even about you, and for patently obvious reasons*? Show me where the bad man touched you. *Namely, while you were the only one that had currently posted in that thread at the time that Hurlshot's post could be even sorta applied to (...and in reality, it couldn't, because you never mentioned blaming religion/Islam, so this should've been your first clue that his post wasn't replying to or specifically about you), the thread was one of many similar threads with similar subjects (i.e. violent attacks) over the past couple of months where what Hurlshot said perfectly applied as well, where there had been multiple people specifically blaming religion/Islam for violent attacks (when there was opportunity to do so, anyways).

Given that they mentioned specifically "General Discussion", a name of one of the sections for the PoE subforums, I think they were talking just about those PoE subforums.

The guide I'm reading on reddit for "how to obtain high end gear quickly and efficiently" is for a previous patch (it's specifically labeled "pre-1.1", so I assume it's no longer working). The subreddit for the game is not quite dead, but...yeah, I got nothing, especially seeing as how, again, I haven't actually ever played it. Sorry!

As I understand, there's not much more to it than the Dark Zone and the later game content in general sucking, and that's why it's basically dead (relatively speaking) on PC, and why it flipped from initially having good user reviews to having poor ones. I have not personally played the game, but that is my understanding of why it wasn't much liked beyond its initial release.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/03/trump-asks-why-us-cant-use-nukes-msnbcs-joe-scarborough-reports.html "Trump asks why US can't use nukes: MSNBC's Joe Scarborough reports" "Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international level went to advise Donald Trump. And three times [Trump] asked about the use of nuclear weapons. Three times he asked at one point if we had them why can't we use them," Scarborough said on his "Morning Joe" program." 'citing an unnamed source' take with a grain of salt

I'm the only one that's replied...besides TrueNeutral, whose reply was only in a moderator capacity, sans the little jab. But anyways, even if you didn't mean what I was saying specifically*, I know what I'm posting, so it's a moot point. Whoa, whoa, whoa, now, and what I am posting is not this. I only did that once, my very first reply. The rest of my posts have been all snark. He's the one that's been saying stuff about me*, not the other way around. *And it comes to me now, that you were probably talking to him, too. O.K., ya' got me.

Hmm...making snarky comments about posters, then saying "let's focus on the posts, not the posters" because of somebody else (i.e. me) doing that exact same thing, and then saying nothing about the actual posts. I mean, I can't blame you, and it is pretty necessary, but it's still pretty funny. Alright, let's get down to brass tacks... Uh, never mind. dips

www.carehome.co.uk/mental-health-hospitals/index.cfm/searchcountry/England

Don't let the door hit you on your way out. Yeah, if only we were so lucky. How come these people are always so incredibly sure about how they're going to be leaving one second, and then not at all the next? Bah, humbug.

Wow. Congratulations, you've graduated from "spouting complete and utter nonsense" to "not even being able to string enough words together to form proper English sentences". At least it's in its own topic this time...

Hmm, judging by the number of wars we've instigated and deliberately decided to be involved with, the number of military, economic, and otherwise political pacts we've made with other countries, all the military bases we have all around the world, and probably a bunch of other things...I would say "probably for at least a while now". Obviously, the actual answer is a lot more nuanced than that...as so should be the question.

I mean, sure, Trump has been completely embarrassing himself and seemingly deliberately trying to make himself seem as unlikable as possible...but when has he not been doing that?

Yeah, that's all great and everything, except for the part where only like 17-18 million people (I can't remember how many votes she got exactly, but it's somewhere around here) actually voted for Hillary in the primaries, out of about 220 million voting-eligible adults in the U.S. (or of an estimated, based on previous elections, 135 million or so people who will actually even be motivated enough to vote this election). In other words, yes, a majority (and I mean this in the most literal sense, as it's not even a supermajority) of the people who voted in the primaries for Hillary might be excited about her (...and we cannot even accurately access how excited people are about Hillary, particularly with all the revelations that were happening towards the end of the primaries as well as after...), but that's ignoring the fact that those core voters are only a fraction of the total amount of people expected to vote for her in the presidential election. Now, the biggest flaw in this argument is that these figures mostly hold true for previous primaries and candidates, too. But, well, when the combined unfavorability ratings of the two nominees are literally historical, I think it's perhaps worth considering the possibility that most people, in general, are even less excited about the prospect of voting for either candidate, and will be "voting against" their least liked candidate even more this election than in previous.