Aristes

"I'm not attributing any pseudo mystical meaning to the term." "He's had poor regular seeason games, too." "Then why have playoffs at all? Right? Nothing mystical about them, so let's just use stats to decide which team is better. There's nothing mystical about the superbowl. Just a game like any particular game during the regular season." "Are you saying the playoffs are mystical? HAHA!" Can't get your point across without putting words in my mouth, huh? No, it's not mystical, but it certainly is a high profile game and the dynamics of the human psyche might work a little different for a playoff game than in a regular season game. So, Delhomme choked. If I were the Steelers, I'd look over my shoulder about now. Looks like a real Wildcard weekend. EDIT: Since I'm the person who used the term mystical first, and to deny any aspect of mysticism in the whole ordeal, I figured I'd quote that usage also.

Now, Kaftan, that DID make me laugh. thanks. lol Did you find anything, in either Norwegian or English that describes WHY the Israelis would target an empty ambulence? I guess it's a rocket attack and, depending on the targetting, I guess it might not have been on purpose. I especially like the fact that it was parked outside of the Norwegian civilian's home. Nuts!

Then why have playoffs at all? Right? Nothing mystical about them, so let's just use stats to decide which team is better. There's nothing mystical about the superbowl. Just a game like any particular game during the regular season.

If we called it "tomato," it would have the meaning we attribute to it. ...And some games are played by both teams at their best. They both make great plays. The offense puts in a solid performance and the defense keeps the opposing team from scoring points. One team wins, but both teams look good. Some games, one team looks good and the other team looks bad. Normally, when we see a team that has performed well all season go into a playoff game or at least a game where its all on the line and make a bunch of stupid mistakes, folks call it choking. It's a term in wide use and your crusade against it won't prevent the use in the future. I know you're a sturdy guy and you're willing to post after post after post after post in order to last word the other guy. Turns out I am also. So, as often as you get hung up on the word "choke," I'll be here to tell you that "choke" is indeed what Delhomme did. The pressure was too much and he threw more interceptions than I've seen in a playoff game in a long time. I'm not using the word choke as a means to steal Arizona's well deserved victory. They played the better game and they looked good doing it. ...At least that's what I get from the score and the highlights. However, no matter what manner of word we use to describe it, Delhomme played well all year and then fell to pieces in a vital game. Because we humans are lazy, we've come up with a quick way to describe this situation. It's "choke." I'm not attributing any pseudo mystical meaning to the term. I'm just saying that they got up there and performed worse than they did during the regular season. I have a different opinion. I hope you don't choke on it.

Actually, if J.E. gets this thing going, i'm going to run out and purchase MotB and SoZ in anticipation of the mod. I played and finished MotB on a friends computer, so I don't even have the game on my system at this time.

You misunderstand me. I think Arizona should get credit for the win, no matter what happened. The defense clearly managed to throw a wrench in the Panthers' offense. ...But Delhomme still choked. If folks don't like the term "choked," then I submit that the QB succumbed to the pressure the defense put on him and his game deteriorated.

Well, so far I got it right on the Ravens, but I was dead wrong on Arizona. We have to give credit to the Cards, but I think Laozi has a point. I didn't see the game, but five interceptions and a fumble? Arizona might deserve the win, but the Panthers completely choked. In the spirit of diplomacy, I'll say it was equallly that Warner played a great game and Delhomme was an "assclown." UGLY night of football for the Panthers and Delhomme most of all.

The wife despises football with a passion, so I normally don't get to see the games, but she's gone until around 6pm tonight, so I might get a chance to see the Titans/Ravens game. I don't know that I'll sit and watch the whole thing beginning to end, but maybe keep taking peeks at it. I don't really care about the NFC game. Now that the Dolphins are out, I'll just root for the AFC in the superbowl anyhow.

Aside from Kaftan's account in his post, who seems to like to goof around, is there real evidence that the Israelis hit a Norweigan ambulance? I mean, it would have to be part of a humanitarian aid package, and I'm assuming that the ambulance was manned by Norweigan volunteers. Otherwise, I'm sure that it would not have been particularly newsworthy. If it did happen, then I'm interested in the particulars. If it did not, then the joke is a little flat (sorry Kaftan). Not because of any partisan pro-Israeli/Palestinian reason, but it just doesn't make sense. Although it is kind of goofy in the same sense as the "chics of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict" thing. As far as using ambulences, I don't think the Israelis should target them. I don't think it's a good excuse to target any civilian or humanitarian vehicle/location unless it is clear that some other entity (such as Hamas) has displaced the civilian or hamanitarian purpose in order to use the vehilce or location for military or terrorist purposes. There has to be some line, and the Israelis have a fairly heavy hand when it comes to things like this. Those of us on the outside, regardless of how we view the conflict on its face, should be willing to continually assess the conflict as it unfolds daily. I think diplomacy can always work. At any time, both sides may be willing to engage in honest and good faith talks of peace. Just because we can't see it now, doesn't mean it cannot happen. It can. For that reason, it's best for folks following the conflict from afar to avoid being completely partisan towards one side or the other. If they're ever to have a lasting peace, both sides need to feel as if their vital interests are served.

"Next time git outa my way, sumbeech."

Someone lobbing missiles into civilian population centers in the US would be an overt act of war. The US has sent troops into Mexico as a result of criminal activity from across the border. If a terrorist group did to the US what Hamas has done to Israel, there is very little doubt that we would respond. Yes, the ACLU and other similar groups would protest, but we'd still do it. We would have every right to do so. After all, whatever folks say about our involvement with Iraq, the mass of the country, including Democrats, backed our move on Afghanistan. Hate to say it bro, but you're all wrong.

I'm weighing it, bro. Just keeping my ear to the ground. I decided to pass on Deadspace. I dunno, but I'll look you up if I get it.

I dunno. I liked VII quite a bit. 6 and 7 were great. 8 wasn't bad. 9 was terrible. I resented the hell out of 3DO for plundering the series. Of course, I think 3DO bankrolled the series from 6 onward, so they deserve credit also. My favorites were World of Xeen, six and seven.

Haha Point well taken. Same thing with Diablo, though. That's the whole thing about saving the kingdom/world/universe style games. What would they EVER do without you?

Yeah, but that doesn't mean the subject matter is a poor choice. If you're saying that you want the action to be faster and the production work to be better, what does that have to do with using Greek Mythology as the basis for the back story. The Diablos were undoubtedly more polished than TQ. Nevertheless, the backstory wasn't better. The production work was. Not only that, but I'm not a big fan of cutscenes. Titan Quest is what I'd call a solid game. It had its moments in the sun, a lot of warts, and the design team managed to pull off the project respectably. If I had my choice, I'd pick Diablo, but my answer was very narrow. I think the ancient Greek myths are a great choice for a story.

Good lord, stay save, Awesomeness! ...And good luck, Guard Dog.

Hell, I thought the Greek setting was a plus for the game. The backstory was certainly vibrant. I might be biased, I suppose, but I thought the setting was perfect for a fast and furious clickfest.

I'm in a tiny guild. Probably some 20 players altogether. I have to say that, although I enjoy the company of my guildmates, I still feel your pain, Matthew. First of all, the reason I stay is because of the people in the guild, virtually all of whom I know in real life. On the other hand, I most often feel like jumping ship because of the people in the guild. That's how it is, right? If you expect a close personal relationship with the other 19 or so folks in your guild to innoculate you against petty infighting, guess again! I also feel your pain when it comes to achievements. Like Gftd1, I enjoy achievements, but it's ridiculous to congratulate a level 75 character for getting an achievement for exploring Elwyn Forest. Wha? During the holidays, when we had somewhere around 10-12 people online, the cheers for grand achievements such as opening a present transcended ridiculous and went straight to sublime. Some of us even laughed about it. ...But you feel compelled to congratulate folks for achievements because we've become so accustomed to it that it's something akin to a snub when you don't say anything! ...and some achievements are noteworthy. Finishing an instance at level warrants a "huzzah!" Getting your first character to 80 warrants a "congrats!" Trick or treating at an inn? Not so much. One of my guildies is my ten year old nephew who will not shut up to save his soul. He's a good kid, but he'll give us running commentary for the last three bubbles of each level. It was total comedy because he said he was going to level any minute and then yelled "HURRAY!" a few minutes later. When we all congratulated him on gaining a level, he explained that he hadn't leveled. He was just celebrating reaching the Menethil boat in time. So, as you can see, being in a close knitt guild doesn't spare you from some of the more egregious pains of guild interaction. However, at least our inane chitchat has personal relevance for us. We can keep each other apprised of health, visits, and other news. It's much better to have a guild where you all know each other and have a vested interest in each other's lives. It deepens my enjoyment of the game immeasurably to share it with family and family friends, even if I do have to remove guild from my chat log for a while every now and then.

Did Jack Smith have something to do with that one? It was a gag Christmas gift from my sister and brother. Inside joke, but the book really isn't all that bad. Jack Smith was a newspaper man from LA. I recently finished a biography of John Adams. I've read several, and I'll probably read more. He's my favorite revolutionary, after George Washington perhaps. After the Jack Smith book, I think I'll choose between two other books I received for Christmas. One Million A.D. and Ender in Exile. I think I already own the Ender book, but I'll start it and see. The 1MAD book doesn't look like my cup of tea, but I'll give it three chapters or 50 pages, whichever is longer. Have to be willing to try new things, after all.

I hated the way horses worked in Oblivion. It had MMORPG written all over it. Horses in the wasteland, or some mutated version thereof, makes a lot of sense. After all, merchants still use brahmin to pull their crap around. As far as legacy code and "bloat." *shrug* A complete non-issue, considering all the places that it pops up as it is. The legacy code apparently didn't kill the sales for Fallout 3. It certainly didn't impact my enjoyment. I didn't say to myself, "wow, I get the feeling there is code for horses lying somewhere around here.... THERE! Under that super mutant! It must be some horse code! I thought that mutant moved oddly fast." Yep, it's really easy to see the similarity between Fallout 3 and Oblivion. That doesn't bother me. I'm looking forward to Oblivion with Guns 2! It'll be awesome.

I'm reading Jack Smith's LA by Jack Smith.

Yes. See, I prefer advocates like Yuusha. He is clearly biased, has no qualms about using mental gymnastics in order to confuse the issue or try to "win" the argument, uses tainted sources, and is an unabashed terrorist sympathizer.* Hey, at least we know where he stands. However, I will say that there is a long history between Christians, Jews, and Muslims. It's not all one sided and there is enough blame to go around, certainly enough to go to Christianity. What happened in the past is not nearly as important as what's happening now. Most important is what we make happen in the future. Where do we want this to go? I tend to take Yuusha's posts with a grain of salt, but I also like to acknowledge truths where I see them. In fact, taking out the link to Hamas' cynical use of Carter as the vehicle of their propaganda and the link to the Electronic Intifada, there's something to be learned from the history he cites. Folks act in their own interests. Jews have suffered from Christian zeal in the past. Adherance to Islam has not equated to militant radicalism throughout history. The point is to find the real answers, and those answers require a bit of soul searching from all corners. We have to be willing to concede that the history doesn't paint any of us in a particularly good light. Nevertheless, regardless of what the electronic intifada might suggest, the peace offer that Arafat rejected was the best offer the Palestinians have had to date. The only other peace offer that we might consider better would be the original boundaries of 1948, but the Palestinians rejected that one as well. Look what that got them. The Arab states rejected peace thereafter in 1967 and fought Israel again only to lose more land. The best deal that the Palestinians have actually taken is the unilateral decision by Israel to pull out of some settlements and construct a security fence. ...And they fought against that. Regardless of the fact that I virtually always disagree so heartily with you, Yuusha, I don't hold any that against you. I can understand looking back on your forefathers. I respect that. But there is probably no human settlement on this planet where the people are the "original inhabitants" of the land. That's not a defense or an apology. It's the truth. We need to face the future, not the past, and the current state of outright hatred does does not lead to a bright peaceful outcome. *Unlike most folks here, Yuusha argues that Hamas is not a terrorist organization. I contend they are. His clever links notwithstanding, I don't see we will ever see eye to eye on the issue.

For me, it's the social aspect. If it weren't for my guild, I'd be spending the time I play WoW playing LotRO. lol Seriously, though, I was barely playing BC by the time WotLK shipped. As it is, I spend a lot of my time online helping my guildies with stuff. I've run Zul Farrak at least 8 times for folks since the latest xpac shipped. I'll have to see, but I don't see myself jumping ship unless my brothers and sisters stop playing. Voice chat playing a game together beats long distance phone calls any day.

Hey, you know how it is in WoW. If the name bar is red, it deserves death no matter what! Seriously, if we could just identify folks who want to harm us so easily in real life, self defense in advance would be a legitimate defense.

I actually agree that negotiation is necessary. In fact, even with the current climate, negotiations might yet yield results. Yes, it's difficult to negotiate with an enemy that touts every concession as proof of your cowardice and a sign of your impending defeat, but Israel must find ways to bolster Palestinian moderates without emboldening radicals. It's not important to me personally that Israel win as there is peace. However, I refuse to accept that Israel should be driven into the sea. Moreover, the Palestinians had as good a deal as they had ever seen at the end of the Clinton Administration and they backed out of it. Arafat, in particular, should be vilified for his role in sinking the agreement. Still, when the Palestinians can produce a moderate leader who is honestly looking to hammer out a deal, then I'm confident there will be one. As it stands, the mistakes Israel has made notwithstanding, I don't see what they can do until there's a change in government or a dramatic change in Hamas' stance towards the Jewsish state.