Zoraptor

Don't think the show has mentioned that at all. In the books the letter was definitely more than alluded to, as Catelyn objected to it in POV and a Glover and a Mormont were sent off to find Reed senior and then get it to The Wall. If they did want to legitimise Jon it would be easy enough to do so- have Robb lodge the letter with someone like the Blackfish. Book version smacks of red herring in any case though, since he may be legitimate already given polygamy and Targaryens go hand in hand.

Mongols were Tengri when they founded their empire, and it was reasonably important for them- can't remember the exact detail but it was a sky god and there was lots of horse related stuff which still persists on the steppe to this day. China is reasonably close to an empire with no founding religion, though from the little that is known it may have been because Qin wouldn't brook any challenge from anyone.

I wouldn't blame Dahrk per se- after all, he can only be as compelling as he is written and Neal McDonough has done a pretty good job with what he's been given. To me the main problem is that the writing is just plain poor, not in its entirety but it feels like different sections of even the same episode were written by different people communicating by carrier pigeon. The result of that is that it just ain't good, everything specific is just detail. The storyline makes little consistent sense (why reassemble Dahrk's totem at all once it was smashed let alone keep it in the least secure place in TV history, just about anything Malcolm Merlyn related), uses deus ex machina (chips that make people walk again, ICBM control wotsit that might as well be magic (plus russian icbms using US military run GPS for guidance and Kaliningrad being in far Siberia), anything related to hacking/ magic/ or how well or poorly people fight, for someone who feeds on death Dahrk seems awfully reticent to kill the good guys exc Laurel and that really was them writing themselves into a corner) and has far too much patented CW Emo Drama. Up until 3 (?) episodes ago we didn't really have a clue what Dahrk's plan was then it was all kind of spewed out in one ep. Having said that, S2 of arrow had quite a OUaT type structure- Slade didn't show up in present time until around the half way point of the season. Thing is though, Flash actually has a lot of those problems too, as did Arrow S2. Speedforce is basically a giant deus ex machina, Barry often acts like an idiot, the whole telling Patty he's the flash or not Drama. But it manages to get away with it by being compelling and charming enough otherwise that you're willing to forgive the problems as being minor, because they are. Arrow though is a sea of niggles at this point with very little either compelling or charming to balance it.

Which politician could possibly be against freedom? And that's why you have right wing types who think freedom is the government (who they purportedly hate) reading everything from everyone and left wing types who think freedom is corporations (who they purportedly hate) using social engineering, self interest and personal bias to decide what can and can not be debated. There's probably no less worthwhile term than 'freedom' in the entire political lexicon, and the political lexicon is replete with utterly devalued terms.

Yeah, they're its three highest rated shows, and Flash usually beats its Fox/ ABC competitors too which is pretty much unprecedented. Having said that, LoT probably didn't do as well as they hoped since it must be pretty expensive to make, and Arrow's ratings have declined markedly.

Eh? Angry Joe is the original angry video game reviewer- I remember him reviewing some of the earliest RPGs ever released, like Fallout 3. I really doubt there was anyone doing that prior to him.

A look inside the Mass Effect theme park ride. Now open at the Great America park near San Fran.

That's for New Zealand, we have a big excess of humanities teachers and a major shortage of science and technology teachers. Don't know how it is elsewhere but you'd certainly know the US situation better than I. There's also a shortage of rural teachers and teachers for remote areas but that's more of a fundamental problem (housing available, reduced social aspects etc) than BA grads deciding to go for teaching as there aren't jobs in anything else then finding there aren't jobs there either.

Will the Renegade Party put Commander Shepard up as its candidate and will s/he then go the debates and summarily execute Hillary then kick Trump out of window then be mildly sarcastic to the debate moderator? Will s/he send his SoS to meet Kim Jong Un then nuke the meeting site for the greater good? Will s/he then get impeached for giving multiple competing endorsements to companies in return for a discount? Will aliens s/he's been warning about invade during the impeachment proceedings? Bioware don't even think of stealing this for ME5, or I'll sue.

And as you say it's subject to educational inflation. A BSc now is worth less than a BSc was thirty years ago because there are- proportionately and absolutely- far more people at university now than then doing degrees. And there's not much point doing that BA for the sake of it and ending up in the stereotypical profession in McDonalds. Education just for the sake of it still has a value, but it isn't an economic one when you can spend 3 years in higher education and end up with a scarcely better job than you'd have without it. A lot of people would be far better off going for a 'polytech' career. In absolute terms by brother in law would probably be better off if he'd stayed an electrician as opposed to switching over to an engineer with its four years of study, being an electrician had studying involved but at least he was paid for it via being an apprentice and the money he was on before and after his degree is near identical though engineers have better conditions such as being salaried by default. And I don't know about elsewhere but we're always being told there are shortages of builders/ electricians/ plumbers etc here while we have hundreds too many (humanities, primarily, there's actually a shortage for science and technical subjects) teachers qualifying for positions that don't exist.

There is the possibility of a System Shock or Baldur's Gate situation where the IP holder doesn't own the new generated content for the specific game (which is why Beamdog couldn't alter dialogue and the like from BG- Bioware owns the copyright on that, not WotC/ Hasbro). That would likely only prevent things like returning characters from VtMB though, and is probably not the case anyway.

Not really. I wouldn't label anyone here as an sjw- the most prominent theoretical sjw is just a self admitted troll. I would. Though the warriors aren't here in any great numbers their supporters have a decent population on this forum. SJWs have affected Obsidian Entertainment. Most obviously here. Well... I don't really see that as being sjwism, per se. I think the Obsidian response was very poor, but not because it was bending the knee to sjws- after all, the actual content of PoE is not notable for being stridently 'progressive' and it was utterly extraneous content- mainly it was about Obsidian being understandably controversy averse. That is based on taking the Obsidian response at face value, ie that they should have asked for the poem to be altered at the time it was submitted as it was always 'problematic'. I don't like the memorials/ user created content at all though I understand why it's there of course; however, it is curated content and was always supposed to be so there was no expectation that anything goes and it was fully free speech, implied or otherwise. If Obsidian wanted it to be uncontroversial content then it was their responsibility to vet what went in whatever form it was. In that, they failed but then tried to shift blame, which was gutless but only peripherally related to sjws. Throwing the writer under the bus later was a decidedly scummy move far more so than any supposed knuckling under to a few twitter warriors and was a clear case of wanting to have the cake and eat it too. In the end though, that's on Obsidian, and it could have been any issue. There's as good a case that the poem was misandry as much as transphobic, after all, if you're a humourless git at least. And, when it comes right down to it it was the most optional of optional content, whether it was there or not effected nothing. If that's the worst impact sjws have had here there isn't much to worry about considering what's happened elsewhere. Try neogaf/ NMA or similar to see what knuckling under really entails. (and in the linked thread itself the original post is from a single post user [which itself makes them unlikely to actually be an sjw, it's only one pretty polite post after all rather than persistent diatribes] and has a handful of likes while one saying it shouldn't be changed has more than ten times the number of likes; it's hardly evidence of a sjw infestation just that some people did genuinely find the joke transphobic)

A shorthand catch all term for for actually regressive (self labelled) progressives. Requires some level of preachiness, hypocrisy, tone deafness, self righteousness, bad faith, self delusion, poor argumentation, lack of logic, pseudo religious zeal etc etc. Has to have an absolute belief that they are doing The Right Thing, that it is some sort of fundamental Struggle and that it is Important in the great scheme of things and must strenuously express their views to everyone who will or won't listen. Strong belief in mutually contradictory/ hypocritical concepts like individual rights and the absolute need to be seen as individuals for those viewed as oppressed (and themselves) as well as a strong belief in an almost taxonomic classification system of 'oppression'. Everybody else- including those from disadvantaged groups who don't agree with the sjw- doesn't get those rights and gets to be part of some sort of oppressive morass where they only exist as a boogeyman. They also have to act on those beliefs, not just hold them. To stress that; these two questions are basically identical in practise as it's actions rather than beliefs that make an sjw. It's perfectly possible- albeit difficult- to believe in the sjw manifesto without actually becoming an sjw because you absolutely have to be an obnoxious knobend to be an sjw; if you don't fulfil that criterion then you can't actually be one. The closest analogue would be something like a evangelical christian who cannot stop evangelising loudly and publicly to the extent that you suspect that tehy're not doing it because they actually believe in the god from the bible but because they love thinking that they're better than others and can't wait to tell people how much better they are. Not really. I wouldn't label anyone here as an sjw- the most prominent theoretical sjw is just a self admitted troll. Kind of. The root problem is not with their politics per se, but their actions and methods. Those problems are shared with a large number of other groups who have radically different specific beliefs- objectivists/ laissez faire absolutists/ ancap; reactionaries, religionists etc are all groups here some individuals share the same problems with method. Randian philosophy is quite a good non religious analogue, with things like its labelling of people as good hard working producer types vs the horrible parasitic types- and of course Objectivists all fall into the former rather than the latter camp. And evangelical objectivists are every bit as annoying, too. 'What can change the nature of a mann individual?'

Asking a question of Bruce is like a broken pencil. Pointless. Actually no. Asking a question of Bruce is like making markers for a Draughts game.

A Snart (could be his in universe sister) is also the mayor of Earth 2 Central City in The Flash, so there's potential there too.

They're hardly going to say it wasn't AAA publicly since to a lot of people on the console side that would say low production values, low quality, don't bother- PC side doesn't care much about that though. 50-60 people is a pretty small team for a supposedly AAA game when you're putting it in the same class as the GTAVs/ CoDs/ Diablos of the world with their supposed 250+ person teams. It is an arbitrary classification, I just couldn't put that size game into the same grouping as the really big budget big team projects..

According to some of the stuff coming out of Lionhead there may have been a complete change of philosophy involved there: So it seems it was more like it had to have a 'XBone philosophy', as was with its 'original' plan when it was going to be all online, all Kinected, all services all the time. Personally I wouldn't have XCOM as being AAA at all- smallish team, smallish budget, smallish sales expectations. Not that it really matters, it just illustrates that 'AAA' isn't a very well defined term so there's plenty of room for personal opinion as to what is it and what isn't.

EU is moving ahead with backup/ Plan B as well- blame Greece and turn it into a massive refugee camp using their economic leverage if (when) the Turkey deal fails.

Which one? The Clinton Foundation payola accusations or the 'State Democrats' war chest where the vast majority of the money is going to Clinton's campaign?

Yeah, the whole article is worthless spin. Unnamed, anonymous US officials say "no evidence that Hillary wilfully broke the law" is not the same as "no evidence that Hillary broke the law, at all". Pro Clinton people will say there won't be charges right up until the point the issue is actually decided publicly, that's just the nature of being pro Clinton.

I'm rather puzzled by the page bug being a thing, I thought these forums used xenforo and other forums using it don't have that problem (eg codex). I always presumed they got shut down as a way of keeping the discussion 'fresh' more than anything. If the people don't facilitate constructive discussion, I'd argue the people are at fault not the rules. Changing the rules should be the last resort. More rules does not equal better discussion, even more specific existing rules doesn't either. The more rules there are the more they are abused and the greater the tendency is- as the opposite from encouraging actual discussion- to have personal feelings and personal opinion be paramount. Say there were a rigorously enforced "no cheering death" rule. Perfectly reasonable, on the face of it. Still open to wildly different interpretations though. Enforce it even handedly and you end up banning a bunch of people who celebrate Osama bin Laden's death, enforce it selectively and you just get rid of 'wrongthinkers' like Qistina or Oby who cheer the wrong deaths. Is having a Abrams vs T## argument cheering death because they've both used to kill people? Or you just end up not having any discussion at all because you can't be sure which edge of the rules you're skirting as there's an endless list of hypocritical to mutually contradictory precedents where nothing/ something happened previously.

Sorry, but... what? While you wouldn't in a million years use SoD/ BG for that purpose using computer games to teach children about real life is certainly a thing every bit as much as using childrens' TV programmes is and has been. Idea is of course to combine the vegetable of learning with the ice cream of entertainment. When Thomas learns that it's nice to share his coal with Gordon or that if you have a heavy load it's better to go slow and steady that is, after all, a life lesson whether it happens on tele or in a game.

Bro, you are dead to me. Much like the eponymous character on The Flash Show Formerly Known as The Flash. I wonder if they'll actually bother changing the opening monologue this time. Though on the positive side I've now remembered I need to watch PoI.