Dantius

Originally Posted By: Dintiradan Thoughts about ME3 ending (and again, the usual caveat: I have yet to play ME3): Click to reveal.. I've got problems with the original endings, but the fact that the Reapers are ostensibly trying to preserve organic life by destroying organics isn't one of them. Sure, it could have been stated more clearly: the Reapers are 'culling' organics, and at the same time propagating and improving themselves by assimilating new species every cycle. And it's something that was foreshadowed: Harbinger made sure we didn't forget that the Reapers were our salvation through destruction yadda yadda yadda. Is it a bad idea? Well, yeah, preserving the collective for the long (looong) term by trampling individuals is a bad idea, but that doesn't stop people in Real Life from thinking so. One problem I do have is making the Reapers slaves of the Catalyst; watching the ending videos is a lot more tolerable when you imagine it as an avatar of the Reapers, rather than their master. Think not I, for one, see no reason why the Reapers can't be represented by a giant Colonel Sanders. That would be awesome.

Originally Posted By: VCH Looks like Nightfall or Cloud Atlas. Both are pretty close, I'd say a runoff is called for. ...Okay, I might just really like polls.

Devil's advocate time: Bioware also produced a little game a ways back called, what was it now- KODOR? KOTHOR? Oh, right, KOTOR- that is now widely renown as the ultimate "twist" ending* that caught everyone by surprise. It also had only two endings: a "good" ending where everyone lives happily every except for Malak, who gets sliced to bits and tossed into a sun, and an evil ending, where you conquer and rule the galaxy. Both of the endings are standard vanilla Bioware, but it's inarguable that the game was: 1. Exceedingly well-written 2. Filled with interesting characters 3. Well-paced 4. Excellently plotted 5. Surprising and replayable , and, of course, a huge critical and commercial success. So why couldn't Bioware simply pull out some ridiculous surprise about the Reaper nobody was expecting, killed off a few characters, wiped out a planet or two, and then let you crush the Reapers into a cybernetic pulp with the combined fleets of the Galaxy and the Crucible, which was really just a giant Death-Star type thing? You say that would be formulaic, but it would also have the added side effects of not infuriating a fanbase that, frankly, was already simmering over the disaster that was DA:II, and provided closer in a classic manner that is known to reap in cash and awards?

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba You mean the war on drugs, right? We'd have a better shot at crippling the cartels by legalizing (or at least looking the other way in certain cases, if you can't stand the idea of legalization) so that the price of drugs go down and the cartels can no longer make a profit off of smuggling them. Especially with marijauna, which is ridiculously easy to grow in the United States. Dikiyoba. Oh, I agree with decriminalization. I just think that it's a bad idea to simply "look the other way" because a lot of people don't like the law. If something is illegal, and that's causing problems, it should be decriminalized. Until that happens, it is still illegal and the law should still apply. Also, whining that someone is punishing you for breaking the law (see also: piracy) doesn't really help your case.

Originally Posted By: Homage Fallout: Equestria _did_ get seconded, just sayin' that being said, i did buy cloud atlas the other day and haven't read it yet, if that was chosen yeah and stuff. False. Fallout:Equestria was not seconded in the poll thread, I just checked.

Originally Posted By: Lilith point of order: cheesecake combines the best qualities of both pie and cake A fair point. Granted.

Originally Posted By: Excalibur Oh, and drug policy. He's very right wing on the issue. Typical politician hypocrisy: I smoked pot and got away with it so now I need to raid your houses with SWAT teams and terrify your families in order to prevent you from smoking pot. Yes, god forbid someone change their mind on a subject as they grow older and look at the more complete picture. And how dare Obama try and stop an illegal activity that funnels millions of dollars to drug cartels a few miles south of the border that are then used to horrifically murder people? I have the freedom to indirectly decapitate Mexicans if I want to- it's practicably in the Constitution! This is fascism, pure and simple!

Originally Posted By: Juan Carlo (especially in the era of Mass Effect 3 where fans will petition developers to change things if they don't like the way a game ends) Quick interjection: The petition, by and large, wasn't to change the ending, it was for Bioware to actually write an ending beyond "Normandy crash-lands on planet following red/green/blue explosion". None of Jeff's games have had this problem, or anything anywhere like it.

Am I to be left as this forums sole defender of blueberry pie? Clearly, a properly done blueberry pie served with vanilla ice cream is the obvious winner in any sort of pie competition.

Originally Posted By: ξ From the other thread: Originally Posted By: Lilith Originally Posted By: Dantius Plus, you know, all the progressive things he's done. Stances on gay marriage, healthcare reform, Dodd-Frank, DADT, etc. his healthcare reform plan is hardly "progressive"; it does a few good things but it also hands roughly half a trillion dollars to private insurance companies. republicans have been pushing for something like it for literally decades. they only started opposing it when a democrat started to support it Conservative! Dantius surely meant that the health care reform was in the column of conservative things that Obama has done. Because any other description of it — a market solution to a social problem — would be ludicrous. And Dantius would never be ludicrous. Are you suggesting that the Republican party would oppose a plan they developed in one of heir think tanks, tested in states under conservative governors, supported as an alternative to Clinton's plan in the 90's, and that is perfectly consistent with their ideology with such vitriol? Clearly, you are being the ludicrous one here. In all seriousness, the fact that any legislation was pushed through is amazing. While it is legitimate to complain that it didn't go far enough (frankly, a single payer system would be more efficient overall and preferable for me at least), I would certainly say that attempting, and succeeding, at making serious strides towards fixing one of the biggest social (and the biggest fiscal) issue with government is certainly a progressive achievement.

22nd is fine by me.

Originally Posted By: Master1 Speaking of Wolfram Alpha, I used it to calculate the definite integral on (0,1). -0.09914769920784134 What's my reward? Can I cash in the bonus points for a prize? I expect there to be a record of DantiusPoints from now on. You get nothing. I want an analytic answer with a closed-form solution.

Originally Posted By: Dintiradan Speaking of which, please tell me this is a joke. I mean, liberals have been threatening to move to Canada since Bush won in 2000. I guess it's just conservatives turn to make useless threats now.

Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S You can just start a new thread and make a post directing further discussion on the topic to a link to that thread. That's much less risking than using the UBB merge function. I have created a continuation thread here for further discussion on the subject, then.

I was originally going to title this thread "Strange men lying in Internet forums distributing opinions is no basis for a system of government!" but the title was too long and UBB wouldn't accept it. A continuation thread for the political discussion in the What have you been reading recently? thread.

Also, is it possible for a mod to magic the past 10 posts to a new thread? This is getting quite far removed from the idea of a "what are you reading" thread, since we're not really discussing the book anymore...

Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S — "Rockefeller Republicans" would cover the moderates and "RINOs" like Olympia Snowe, Scott Brown, and the like? Yes. Usually the reason that the label RINO is applied is because they don't toe the ridiculously convoluted party line, but that's largely because they're actually toeing a separate ideogroup line more-or-less exactly, and it's that that doesn't mesh with the GOP. Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S — How is Obama a progressive poster child? His politics are (and have always been) just like Clinton's, and extremely moderate. He is well-liked by progressives simply because progressives tend to be young, so have the choice between Reagan, the Bushes, and Clinton/Obama... and of the latter two, Obama is more articulate. Obama is very moderate, and is reflexively bipartisan, even when it burns him, but I'd say that more than any recent president he has a set of coherent, forward-thinking beliefs (that Clinton lacked) that would characterize a progressive in spirit, if not necessarily in policy. Plus, you know, all the progressive things he's done. Stances on gay marriage, healthcare reform, Dodd-Frank, DADT, etc. Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S For the left side of things, Wikipedia offers the following split: — General Liberals (largest group) — "Progressives" (Dean, Kucinich) — Democratic Libertarians (Feingold, Gravel) — Blue Dogs — Centrists (Clinton, Obama) That doesn't correspond well to constituents, though. I think if you really want to break up democrat votes, you have to do so more crudely, and start talking about minorities, academia, unions, and liberal professionals. Yeah, and that's one reason why it's easier to identify right groups easier than left groups. For all the stereotypes about the Right being the party of rich white men, it really does only have two main constituencies: rural voters, who tend to fall under the first and third groups I identified, and the upper-middle to upper-class, who tend strongly towards the second and fourth. Democrats, on the other hand, not only have a wide range of component groups- unions, minorities, immigrants, etc., but the ideological issues they face can cut across groups and fragment them in ways that the Republicans don't have to deal with. So fittingly, even though the Republicans have inter-party issues to deal with, they are well-defined, structured, and quite quantifiable, whereas the Democrats' inter-party issues are so nebulous and on so many levels they're very, very difficult to address.

Every time this poll is run, the result is usually a statistical tie between Avernum/Exile 2 and Geneforge 1, with X3 in a close second. I highly doubt it will be any different this time.

Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S That's interesting. What would you pick out as the eightish ideogroups? Hmm. It's easier to pick out Republican ones that Democrat ones, possibly because there's more cross-group exchange on the Left. Just off of the top of my head, the groups ideology and a representative politician. Also note that I reached for the closest label available, which in some cases has became a pejorative as time has gone by. No offense really meant, it's similar to calling the PPACA "Obamacare" just so people know what you're talking about. If you have a better suggestion for a name, say so. Republicans: 1. Paleoconservative/Libertarian: Focus on States' Rights and even more individual rights. These are the ones into constitution worship and originalism. Ron Paul would be an example. NB: The Tea Party broadly falls under a hybrid of this category and the next, but they shouldn't be put in the next one because they lack the crucial social liberalism. 2. "Rockefeller Republicans": Socially liberal, very very rich. Tend to focus on lower taxes and fiscal restraint/balanced budgets. Mitt Romney was this before he went hard right. 3. Religious Right: Social issues voters. Abortion, gay marriage, Ten Commandments, creationism/ID in schools, all that jazz. Rick Santorum would typify the group, although some in it wouldn't be keen on his Catholicism, although that particular strain seems to be dying out. 4. Neoconservatives: Flatteringly described as "liberals mugged by reality". Unflattering described as... see any left-of-center publication, 2000-2008. George Bush. Democrats: 5. Progressives: Progressives. They progress. Focus mainly on some sort of reform, sometimes single issue, sometimes not. I'd say they're more highly academic than most other groups, and certainly more highly educated. Importantly, despite a common ideological framework, there's still inter-group disagreement on policy that other ideogroups lack. Obama would be their poster child, although some are disenchanted with him now. 6. "Limousine Liberals": Left-wing counterpart to the RR's. Wealthy, but very much on focused on accomplishing a wide range of liberal social and/or economic goals. They aren't as strongly progressive as the Progressives, since some have a vested interest in certain parts of the status quo. FDR would be the best example of this, but he's dead. Kerry, maybe? 7. The Unions: On the downswing now for various reasons. Organized labor. Focused mainly on economic issues for the middle and lower-middle classes. A politician slips my mind. That's what I can think of off the top of my head, at least.

I've started It's Even Worse Than it Looks by Mann and Ornestein. It argues that US congressional politics have basically changed into the politics of a Parliamentary democracy with numerous well-delineated, highly partisan factions in acrimonious conflict with one another (even when "one another" are members of the same overarching party). Of course, while this isn't a bad thing, the problem is that the US constitutional system is emphatically not equipped to handle it, what with it's focus on bipartisanship, limited government, and separation of powers, rather than the wide latitude to do as they please that winning coalitions in parliamentary democracies enjoy. The result, of course, are things like the whole debt ceiling fiasco, where a faction within one of the parties was able to successfully force the party as a whole to follow along with its goals, effectively stopping compromise and bringing government to a standstill. The argument makes perfect sense, really. It's quite easy to pick out around eightish ideologically distinct groups in the political spectrum that for various reasons are working together when frankly they probably shouldn't be (cf. the Religious Right and Ayn Rand-style free market devotees have quite little in common, despite both being ostensibly "republican"), simply because they require the aegis of a larger party to have influence on the process at all. Fascinating and scary stuff, and especially relevant now of all times.

...but you have to admit, this new Google feature is pretty sweet.

Originally Posted By: Jewels in Black ... Sy, I think Dinti will be having quite a work out but it will be from running away. As for the program, I have been meaning to find something to get back into. Use to go to the gym and quite enjoyed it. Use to practice kuykido with the boys till my kneecap tried to dislocate on a jump switch.. stupid old injury. I've been feeling (and seeing) the effects of inactivity so I'm in. Being a year out of practice from formal push-ups I only made it to 5. If you're having knee troubles, I'd recommend biking. I used to run a lot, but since my mid 30's it's just been too much stress on my knees and legs, so I usually bike now. Haven't had any serious problems with them since I started, and an hour or two a day on a bike goes a long way towards keeping you active.

Originally Posted By: Actaeon Was Rache German, or a big Sherlock Holmes fan? Somebody else watches Sherlock here? Good, I was beginning to doubt the board's collective taste...

Originally Posted By: Parakeet How depressing. Why does government & commerce need to usurp and increase what Mothers do? & to think I was considering an ebook reader since the purse chews up paperbacks so badly. 1. The Government had nothing to do with that article. It's just about ebook publishers and releasers like Amazon. 2. The eBook's aren't censoring what you see or read, they're just taking notes on your reading style so they can better tailor their suggestions to things that you would like and therefore buy, and altering your reading experience of the books themselves so it's more enjoyable and that, again, you're more likely to buy. It all comes down to money in the end. Then again, just about everything comes down to money in the end.

Level! Originally Posted By: Lamya Jaquel (Dantius) Level 2 Human Female STR: 2 [+1] DEX: 2 INT: 4 PER: 2 HP: 8/6/14 AC: 12 MS: 4 Feat: Well Read (+4 INT rolls 1PD) First Aid: 5 [+1] Deception: 5 [+1] Observation: 2 Tactics: 1 Streetwise: 1 Gun Knowledge (Energy): 1 Sneak: 1 [+1] Click to reveal.. (Inventory) Scrubs (Pink) Labcoat (White) Backpack Mobile Computer System (MCS)[MPC 100%] Click to reveal.. (Backstory) It was strange, in a way. Not too long ago, Dr. Jaquel had everything going for her. She had graduated summa cum laude from a presteigous medical university in the Imperial core, just completed her residency at a famous medical clinic at the Capital, and had received numerous offers from hospitals for salaries that seemed, frankly, obscene. Then, one day, she recieved notification that all her families accounts had been frozen due to suspected tax fraud. The next, she heard that both her parents, what had been wealthy investment bankers, and her brother Clyve, who had been studying ot be a geneticist, had died in a bizarre life-support failure on their spacecraft as they travelled to their vacation home. The next day, she upped and... left. Well, dissappeared would be more precise. None of her friends could contact her, she left no forwarding address, and told noone where she was going or planning. She fell off the map for a decade, and then resurfaced quietly on the backwater planet of Srafin, running a medical clinic that provided free care to the locals. Of course, many question remain unanswered. Where, exactly, was she for ten years? How was she getting the of credits needed to underwrite her care? Why, under her violently pink scrubs and labcoat that she wore everywhere, was she concealing slim suit of high-quality custom armor? And why, one day, did she shut down her clinic and then show up, haggard and sleepless, in a bar a five thousand kilometers away, so desperate to get off-planet that she threw in her lot with five total strangers to hunt down a kidnapper?