BruceVC

This is a very good post as it offers both factual and philosophical insights into the state of Communism both past and present I can agree to some of what you are saying but I think you are underestimating how much the only reason Communism sustained itself for so long wasn't because people really thought the system benefitted them but because Communism was enforced through military and dictatorial mechanisms So you had no choice to support the various Communist regimes When the USSR collapsed its interesting how almost none of the ex-USSR states followed new governments that were Communist in a nature, they all attempted to embrace Western culture and political ideology So it just highlights how disliked Communism was by the majority of the countries who were forced to live under it

Exactly, hence the need to approach legalization intelligently. It is hard to enforce when people are under the influence of pot. In most states, just the smell or a small amount is enough to get the driver off the road, but if it is a legal substance, that no longer happens. So we need a better system to police it. Wait, what? So we should just accept that people are going to drive under the influence, and ignore the issue? No. As I said, it's already illegal to drive while your ability is impaired. Just because pot becomes legal doesn't mean it's suddenly ok to drive around stoned, any more than it's ok to drive around while your ability is impaired due to all sorts of currently legal substances. The issue is one in your head, not in reality. This is actually a very valid point, I hear what Hurlshot is saying as I hear similar arguments in South Africa.." we can't legalize Marijuana because people will come to work stoned and be unproductive " ( this is similar to the concern of people driving on weed ) But if you come to work stoned this would be the same as coming to work drunk. You would get fired, just because something is legal and it impacts your senses this doesn't mean people will automatically do it in environments where this is unacceptable. And this applies to driving and working

I agree, sadly Communism is definitely not dead and many people still think it offers them a way of realistic economic transformation In South Africa we still have a Communist party that is part of what is called the "Tripartite Alliance " which is a political union between the ANC, the Trade Unions and the Communist party Its more significant from a symbolic perspective than a policy perspective as they claim to have the interests of exploited workers as there main goal But there are also many examples within the trade unions where you hear speeches from some of there leaders around " we need new radical economic policies and nationalisation policies " and these reek of the old Communist perspective. The irony in the South African context is most of these leaders have quite happily enriched themselves through free markets and Capitalist initiatives so I really question how committed they are to this idea of the state being able to control and drive the economy and implement successful economic change

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/16/world/europe/germany-by-numbers/index.html So its been 25 years since the Berlin Wall fell, now for most of us this was a very important historical step as it signified the end of the Cold War and fact that Communism was a failed ideology and form of government But I know that there are several people on these forums who think that Communism isn't that bad and the world nowadays could maybe benefit from that type of government? But anyway lets hear what you guys think about how the Cold War ended 25 years ago. I know there are some members who live in ex-Communist countries like Czech and Poland. So how do you feel about your new governments? I think the world is a much better place since the end of the Cold War and I really believe that non-Communist governments offer there citizens more opportunities and a better quality of life

I agree but I suppose you have to have some exceptions like Heroine which most countries criminalize and don't allow you to legally consume because of the addictive nature of the substance

Yeah I hear you about the legal dichotomy between the Fed and state laws that exists in some cases I was watching a documentary on CNN about the states that have legalised Marijuana and how this has created huge amounts of revenue and is very profitable but because the Federal government still considers Marijuana an illegal drug they wont allow the various weed shops to deposit any money directly, generated from weed sales, into banks and people have to pay for the stock with cash. So the owners of these shops normally always have huge amounts of money on there premises which they have to probably keep "under there mattresses " Its a weird legal issue that exists because of the fact that various states have legalised something the Fed considers illegal

The butthurt is strong with this one. A few left-leaning states voted as expected, this is supposed to prove something? True raising the minimum wage is fairly popular, but mostly only people earning the minimum wage feel strongly about it. And as we have seen, states that want it are perfectly capable of doing it for themselves, it doesn't have to be done at the federal level. WOD when do you think Texas will legalize Marijuana for recreational use? I imagine this will take some time as I consider Texas conservative when it comes to these types of issues?

We off to an awesome Sunday Farmers Food market today, lots of great food and stalls that offer unique and interesting offerings And its a stunning sunny day so its a perfect time for a flea-market excursion

We could really start privilege checking by how the social justice warriors are all about bringing up and dominating the discussion with white people's problems. Do SJW really bring up only white peoples problems, I always though the movement was much broader than that and included minorities ?

Valid points raised, I suppose I should have asked " why he hates his country " Hoonding why do you hate your country ?

I had steak for supper last with potato wedges. I make this killer cheese sauce which really compliments any meal ...that is if you like cheese. But who doesn't like cheese

That is no excuse... In 2001 Bergen Linux Group implemented RFC1149 (IPoAC) as put forth by the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force). Internet! Ping result: Script started on Sat Apr 28 11:24:09 2001 vegard@gyversalen:~$ /sbin/ifconfig tun0 tun0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol inet addr:10.0.3.2 P-t-P:10.0.3.1 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:150 Metric:1 RX packets:1 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 RX bytes:88 (88.0 b) TX bytes:168 (168.0 b) vegard@gyversalen:~$ ping -c 9 -i 900 10.0.3.1 PING 10.0.3.1 (10.0.3.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=6165731.1 ms 64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=3211900.8 ms 64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=5124922.8 ms 64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=6388671.9 ms --- 10.0.3.1 ping statistics --- 9 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 55% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 3211900.8/5222806.6/6388671.9 ms vegard@gyversalen:~$ exit Script done on Sat Apr 28 14:14:28 2001 Crazy Norwegians... Nobody seems to have implemented RFC2549 yet (RFC1149 with QoS enhancements) Edit: For good measure, BLUG's description of the event Edit2: Just for Bruce, a quote from the wiki page: Good post Gorthfucious And that exercise was true at time, I remember it very well. The good news is we have upgraded large parts of our fibre infrastructure since then so I doubt the pigeon would win now

Yes I did My advice is before you think how terrible it is living in a first world country you should see how the rest of the world lives. Is it an unreasonable comment from me?

You know my only beef with Skyrim was the unmodded Dragons were a bit too easy. I watched from a mountain top while a group of Bandits in Silent Stones took down a dragon. Why the heck does Skyrim need ME to save it? Then I downloaded the Deadly Dragons mod. Now you need to pack a lunch to fight them. Glad to see DA:I is doing that part right. GD you know I still haven't played Skyrim yet, I have the Legendary Edition which I purchased just after you bought your copy I am really looking forward to playing it with several Mods like Deadly Dragons

And... Smurfs are cute

Yes its called privilege blindness and is not uncommon for people who live in first world countries. You think you have a really bad deal with your governments and social situation, but in fact you don't

You right, I should try to be more civil Hiro can we be friends or at least be more friendly ?

Bruce, you've shown to be dishonest in the WOT forum. And you're all for dishonesty and no integrity which I've shown the entire forum in the gaming thread. You don't need to bring your trolling and dishonesty in this subforum and thread now. So instead of trolling this forum which I've shown that having a high charisma on one or your characters in the game can be beneficial, how about talk about the game? In fact other people have come on and liked or agreed with having one party member with high charisma. Now that is irrefutable evidence and logical analysis. But ignore those people why don't you. You're concerned about me? LMAO. Or are you going to keep on trolling? Because I haven't seen you do anything in this thread other than go on the attack with me. But I guess being a sore loser is part and parcel of being proven wrong on many accounts in the WoT forums. So how about lets talk about the game instead of you trolling this thread. If anyone needs to apologise it's you. So how about that apology Bruce? I doubt I'll get it. Lets get back on topic. I know it's hard for you to do but I know you have it in you. Wow, when I read a response like this I almost want to never comment in another one of your discussions again. All I get is criticism and my head being bitten off But I won't do that to you, I know how much you appreciate my input...you just have a strange way of showing it

This is a very good post. Around the topic of Romance its both erudite and reasonable Welcome to the promancer army...I am going to suggest we make you a major in our grand cause . We need people of your insights

This is a good read about some of the misunderstandings around the what the Mid-Term election results mean

http://www.pcgamer.com/dragon-age-inquisition-hands-on-with-the-first-five-hours/#page-1 This is some good feedback around some real time playing the game....dragons ..dragons seem deadly

you funny

*Chuckles* It's quite humorous seeing you flailing and flip-flopping like a drowning man. The last gasps of air as you try to fling this back onto others before finally drowning. I can picture it now. Grom-wah waving his hand angrily trying to argue the point and then seeing you finally go under. But that's okay Grom-wah, you can still believe what you want. You keep that charisma around 4 and 5 on your characters. Some of us will have a leader with a CHA up to 8 and actually test this in game without the hypoethetical theorycrafting that you're trying to tell us and say our leader doesn't make a difference. hehe, your characters with 4 or 5 charisma. Yeah, great testing. *guffaw* Huh? As I read Gromnir's posts, he never suggested that having more than 1 ranger with CHA>1 was useful. He has been consistent in asserting that the XP effects of CHA are too insignificant to justify investment in the attribute, and that the one thing that makes CHA desirable (at least since the most recent patch changed the rules) is that it dictates the radius of the +2%/Level hit chance boost around a character with the Leadership skill. (FWIW, I agree on both points.) As such, his guess is that a CHA around 4 or 5 is the point where investment in the attribute is cost-justified. (On that point, I don't have enough information to make a judgment. I know that 7 is enough to have a healthy radius; if I built another team, I'd try a lower CHA than that and see how it worked.) Anyhow, the willingness on both your parts to continue baiting one another is tiresome. Gromnir (at least his board personality) is a pugnatious guy and seems to get significant satisfaction out of puncturing what he sees as weak reasoning, and you seem to be oddly defensive about having built your team the "right" way. Neither of you is going to convince the other, so why not just leave it be? So... There's something particularly entertaining about punching a giant robot scorpion until it explodes. I think the best solution is just for Hiro to admit he is wrong and apologize to Gromnir for making him explain his point over and over again? That's what I would do if I was faced with such irrefutable evidence and logical analysis ?

You guys have had it easy when it comes to your access to early technology. Growing up in South Africa and due to Apartheid and sanctions we didn't have any of these early technologies....we had to rely on carrier pigeons and smoke signals to play RPG. Now THAT is hardcore !!!!

Its really a good question, who will you side with? I am leaning towards the Mages but I want to understand the history and motives from both sides before I make my mind up