BruceVC

And? Why do you think this is weird, its the absolutely necessary and expected thing that any government should do after preventing a terrorist attack and still being a target

Not really. The vast majority of people 'buy into conspiracy theories'. There are few people out there so skeptical as to not believe anything, or so stupid as to not think conspiracies happen. There are many though that have been brainwashed to not realize what it is they are even thinking, and that they've been conditioned to not think. You happen to be one of the people who use 'conspiracy theory' as a pejorative. As a student of history you should know better. The entire purpose of 'conspiracy theory' being a pejorative is to marginalize points of view, and stymie questioning and lines of thought that might be contrary to the official narrative as given by government(s) and mainstream media, whatever that may be. Nevermind that what the official narrative is might be a conspiracy theory itself. Nevermind that most people on planet earth have participated in a conspiracy of some sort at some point in their lives. Many of us a great many. Though I suppose this is less true for the growing number of anti-socials out there (as one needs more than just oneself to conspire). If you want to debate and offer other possibilities in regards to 'conspiracy theory' X that's ever brought up, go for it. Do it on the merits of the evidence and those ideas. To dismiss evidence or a possibility out of hand as a 'conspiracy theory' because it doesn't jive with what you think already happened or is possible is foolish at best. I'm not calling people who don't necessarily 'believe in' (it's not a matter of faith for most people) X brainwashed, I'm calling the people who would dismiss X as 'crazy', a 'conspiracy theory', or whatever out of hand before they even consider the evidence brainwashed. They have been conditioned to reject alternative viewpoints and evidence that might contradict their world view out of hand. Sorry Vals but somethings I can just dismiss without the need to have a debate, I'm fortunate like that. I know when something is nonsense

So you think there are no terrorists? From my posts with him he falls more into the camp where most terrorists are the creation of Western governments and there threat is exaggerated to give governments more control of our lives

Agreed but if they pool resources as far as improved monitoring of Internet communication is concerned it makes there overall effectiveness better and they are more likely to detect suspicious behavior I know some people will see this a "more big brother" but its not. It makes sense

I read the article and watched the whole interview with Anita which was painful at times. I want to share my views with you guys as I want to be constructive Firstly Malc raises a valid point but not for the reason he mentions. SJ causes are much easier to get support for from mainstream media like ABC. They have been doing it much longer and as you guys know certain media companies support SJ movement. Does GG have this kind of support so you can also get your message across because it you don't you are clearly at a disadvantage as people outside this discussion will only see one side Just from this documentary you can see how they have positioned GG and parts of it are unfair. Her interview wasnt that bad in the sense almost everything she said did happen, like her having bodyguards and Wu having to leave her house. But of course the context was missing and obviously she only spoke about the bad that GG has done. But she doesn't control the anti-GG movement and can't held responsible for what others say. Yet you guys are really judged and associated with one label for most people. Thats unfair as I said But the documentary wasn't very good for GG, it made it look quite extreme. But there was some alternative views from that Chris Scott guy its just not something most would remember, oh did you notice the "remove hookers from GTA was also raised " ....glad others are also suggesting it so it can't be such a bad idea ? But my point is you need to ask yourselves what you can do about this type of negative exposure? Maybe you don't care and maybe there is nothing you can do, I don't know ? I just know it cant be great to have a news channel and there audience think you are misogynistic, rednecks who are so opposed to change you resort to violence So in summary I do think overall the documentary clearly positioned the whole debate in a very one sided way...so some people will have the wrong idea about what GG stands for?

Not up to your normal high standards of posting hey Volo

Yes I'm very supportive of these types of joint information sharing initiatives Both countries, and other places, have probably invested the most into trying to stop the spread of fundamentalism, Both countries are targets of extremist attacks so its make sense to pool resources

Why who does profit from this ? And please don't say that the USA is behind the rise of Islamic extremism so they can money from it

But if he is using Steam then his games would be working? He is saying his games aren't working? Well, I assumed he meant how a great many games come out full of bugs these days or with serious fundamental design flaws and are really only good (in many people's eyes anyways) after they are modded (if they are ever even good; but modders try). Some games on Steam are very hard to mod or hard to get a mod to work on (ie: most people I know who played Civ4 (I used to play a lot of Civ4 MP) could never get mods to work with that game if it was installed as a Steam game). You probably right but we do need more information about his issue because games do work on Steam and obviously Mods enhance functionality but they aren't necessary?

But if he is using Steam then his games would be working? He is saying his games aren't working?

Your view is not uncommon, many people get frustrated But what games can't you get working?

LOL Yea... it's totally unreasonable to dislike some folks because they attack and bomb where you live over a period of years. Totally! Sure, but apart from the bombings and the invasions there reason are unreasonable

I can understand how easy it can be to look around the world and say " Muslims are getting more and more extreme and intransigent" But thats a spurious view, we know there are pockets of Islamic fundamentalist throughout the world. And you ALWAYS gets riots and venting and burning of Western flags in countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan. Thats a given. but thats because the people of those countries dislike the West for a variety of unreasonable reasons. We need to accept that, its a reality that the world faces a threat on different levels from extremism. People like myself have been saying this for the last 14 years....yes 9/11 really happened and was committed by Al-Qaeda But that doesn't mean that the vast majority of Muslims support violence. So we mustn't exaggerate this problem which leads to a tacit and open increase of Islamophobia. And we want to avoid this

But you not answering my question, how much was staged, you need to think about that if you are going to entertain that this event wasn't genuine Hopefully you will come to the only logical conclusion, there were far to many events that happened during the attack and after it that have proved that it was real

So what do you think would be the reason for this subterfuge ? And do you think the entire thing was staged including the victims who were killed

not fooling anyone save you you mean? am running out of fish. ​still no discussion o' the list you posted? *chuckle* as we said, at this point we can be complete transparent and you will still continue with the farce. lord knows o' the dozens o' threads on these board with some mention o' codex (quick search says 85), we has participated in few, and in most such threads where we has participated, a rpgcodex reference by Gromnir is nowhere to be found. conversely, if we do happen to "slander" codex and you is anywhere in metaphorical earshot... well, is like flies to p00p. complete transparent and still the performance continues. HA! Good Fun! Gromnir I see the same thing that happens to me with some of your text starts getting highlighted and becomes bold. Do you use Chrome, anyway the solution is just at the end of your post just highlight the whole post and use the Remove Format, this will set it back to normal. Remove format is at the top, second icon

Meshugger, question Would you say you are offended by some of the derogatory comments on Codex? And if you aren't can you tell me why ? But please think carefully about my question and your answer because I'll be asking you another question after that No, The whole concept of "offensive" for me, is if I should take person's opinion seriously or not. Sometimes the "foul" and "offensive" language is just plain ****posting that adds nothing of value, where i later find myself automatically scrolling past the the said persons posts. But at other times, a good point can be found beneath that edginess and vulgarity, which can bring new insight or will cause me to challenge my believes. I also truly believe that people are more honest in how they are expressing themselves if language is little to no controlled. As of emotional response to being offensive, there's is little to none. I get more angry at stupid people. Hitchens explains it better than me: Fair enough. But do you believe other people getting offended by homophobic or racist comments on a website like the Codex is justified Or do you think sometimes people are overly sensitive ?

Nice

Meshugger, question Would you say you are offended by some of the derogatory comments on Codex? And if you aren't can you tell me why ? But please think carefully about my question and your answer because I'll be asking you another question after that

Wow, very scary Its always very sobering when we realize how close we are sometimes to life threatening developments

The Codex is moderated, juuust not in the style that you're used to. I like it how it is. If it was moderately or overmoderated I wouldn't visit there very often. Fair enough, if you don't mind me asking I'm interested in what type of moderation style is used on the Codex ? http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/rules-of-the-codex-enhanced-edition-directors-cut-2013.87048/ Thanks, I'll go through this

The Codex is moderated, juuust not in the style that you're used to. I like it how it is. If it was moderately or overmoderated I wouldn't visit there very often. Fair enough, if you don't mind me asking I'm interested in what type of moderation style is used on the Codex ?

you funny Gromnir

Why would they want to do that? One of the fundations of the Codex is that lax of moderation. If your sensibilities can't take it, then don't read it, simple as that. 100 % I get that and thats why I don't frequent Codex, But we always seem to talk about the lack of moderation so I'm just interested in the Codex's history if anyone who runs the website has tried to implement moderation? Because surely it must have come up where people say " okay its time we tried to enforce certain standards" I may be completely wrong and maybe it has never been raised ?

I appreciate your honesty but yes you obviously "can't see the wood for the trees " if you think the some of the comments on the Codex are normal and acceptable I didn't say they were acceptable or normal Bruce. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. Didn't mean to put you on the spot KP, but the truth most people would only find certain insults " mild " because they are not the victims of a particular verbal attack or they don't belong to a certain demographic so its much harder to relate to a particular invective if you aren't personally targeted So I assume you aren't a gay, african-american jew? Therefore you may think some of the comments are "mild" ....but you aren't on the receiving end.