1
General Discussion / Re: Elements Christmas Sweeptakes!
« on: December 20, 2010, 08:46:38 am »
This game on real cards. I mean real cardboard. Yeah.
Guest Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by a guest. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1] 2
2
General Discussion / Re: [Poll] How many nymphs do you have?
« on: November 21, 2010, 01:43:03 pm »
I have 8 uniques, 14 in total.
Purple, 2x Grey, 2x Amber, 2x Auburn, 2x Green, Nymph Queen, White and 3x Turqouise.
Me is a lucky git!
Purple, 2x Grey, 2x Amber, 2x Auburn, 2x Green, Nymph Queen, White and 3x Turqouise.
Me is a lucky git!
3
Patch Notes and Development News / Re: AI improvements
« on: July 14, 2010, 02:18:32 pm »
The AI just used the Eternity/Never-deck-out Combo on a Phoenix. 
Luckily I had a steal on my hand and the Eternity wasn't protected...
Nice work.
Luckily I had a steal on my hand and the Eternity wasn't protected...
Nice work.
4
Humor / Re: One of our members is a hacker!!!
« on: June 25, 2010, 11:46:00 am »
You can't fool us, [you]!
Second, first - it doesn't matter! Stop hacking, goddamnit. Even when I just hacked [you]'s account, [you] immediately hacked back. God, I HATE [you]!
Stop pretending your innocence [you]!
Second, first - it doesn't matter! Stop hacking, goddamnit. Even when I just hacked [you]'s account, [you] immediately hacked back. God, I HATE [you]!
Stop pretending your innocence [you]!
5
Humor / Re: One of our members is a hacker!!!
« on: June 25, 2010, 11:30:45 am »
[you], you just don't get it, right? NEVER try to quote me, but [you] is the hacker!
But don't give up guys, I'm a hacker, too. I'm hacking [you]'s account right now and will reset it. All cards gone, all electrum gone, all points gone.
In your face, [you]!!!
But don't give up guys, I'm a hacker, too. I'm hacking [you]'s account right now and will reset it. All cards gone, all electrum gone, all points gone.
In your face, [you]!!!
6
Religion / Re: Re: The Compendium of Beliefs
« on: January 21, 2010, 04:14:45 pm »
Well, I hear you. And to a certain extent I am with you.
I believe you are uttering the pondering of many a person, not only in this forum.
That said, I have to probe a bit deeper into my former question. As much as I am with you on a chivalry code, as much I have to ask the following:
But even under that assumption: Why give women and children more importance in their right to stay unharmed? Is it more appropriate to hurt or humiliate a male?
Let me clarify this by the modification of your statement:
"I'm simply saying that if I were to offend a man and he were to lash out or hit me, the last thing I (or any one else for that matter) would do is hit him back."
I believe we have to change our balderdash of "emancipation" and "same rights for everybody" into what we pretend is there of it. Else it is nothing, but a pack of lies.
To state that a man is expected to defend his honour in a harming way (obviously by hitting the other person, or lashing out in a non-physical manner) from another male being is dissembling in the face of the belief that man and woman are equal. (Children being small men and women!)
[My apologies for strange looking constructions and word choices, I am not a native English-speaker
)
I believe you are uttering the pondering of many a person, not only in this forum.
That said, I have to probe a bit deeper into my former question. As much as I am with you on a chivalry code, as much I have to ask the following:
Quote
Maybe you took the 'harming' to mean it in a literal and physical sense, but you can harm someone in a more ways than just physically.I am with you on harm in many different ways. I'd probably even say that physical and psychic damage are equal in there severity. (Maybe the latter is even more destructive..)
But even under that assumption: Why give women and children more importance in their right to stay unharmed? Is it more appropriate to hurt or humiliate a male?
Let me clarify this by the modification of your statement:
"I'm simply saying that if I were to offend a man and he were to lash out or hit me, the last thing I (or any one else for that matter) would do is hit him back."
I believe we have to change our balderdash of "emancipation" and "same rights for everybody" into what we pretend is there of it. Else it is nothing, but a pack of lies.
To state that a man is expected to defend his honour in a harming way (obviously by hitting the other person, or lashing out in a non-physical manner) from another male being is dissembling in the face of the belief that man and woman are equal. (Children being small men and women!)
[My apologies for strange looking constructions and word choices, I am not a native English-speaker
)
7
Religion / Ethics and Gender
« on: January 21, 2010, 11:33:45 am »Quote
Secondly, never harm a woman or child.I'd like to know why men are of lesser worth.
Global Moderator Comment Altered thread title to something useful. -Daxx
8
Religion / Re: A Philosophical Perspective on the Supernatural
« on: January 13, 2010, 10:57:45 pm »
Well... it probably does - but with Kant you have a scientific edge to it. Whatever that is worth to you.
On a more serious note: Kant built a whole system-theory. Within that theory it wouldn't hold true, if the statement was just made based on empiric knowledge (experience).
On a more serious note: Kant built a whole system-theory. Within that theory it wouldn't hold true, if the statement was just made based on empiric knowledge (experience).
9
Religion / Re: A Philosophical Perspective on the Supernatural
« on: January 13, 2010, 12:21:26 pm »
7.) since I am not talking about a pattern, a logic, a structure here, but infinity itself, I dare to say, that it's absolutely impossible.
8.) nothing sensible can be said.
This holds true, when you follow the argumentation of Kant in his: "Die Kritik der reinen Vernunft" or in English "Critique of Pure Reason". Note: Critique here does not means criticism, but discerning.
Critique definition from Wikipedia: Especially in philosophical contexts it is influenced by Kants use of the term to mean a reflective examination of the validity and limits of a human capacity or of a set of philosophical claims and has been extended in modern philosophy to mean a systematic inquiry into the conditions and consequences of a concept, theory, discipline, or approach and an attempt to understand its limitations and validity. A critical perspective, in this sense, is the opposite of a dogmatic one.
Time (Infinity) would be a priori. You can't falsify it, neither can you verify it.
8.) nothing sensible can be said.
This holds true, when you follow the argumentation of Kant in his: "Die Kritik der reinen Vernunft" or in English "Critique of Pure Reason". Note: Critique here does not means criticism, but discerning.
Critique definition from Wikipedia: Especially in philosophical contexts it is influenced by Kants use of the term to mean a reflective examination of the validity and limits of a human capacity or of a set of philosophical claims and has been extended in modern philosophy to mean a systematic inquiry into the conditions and consequences of a concept, theory, discipline, or approach and an attempt to understand its limitations and validity. A critical perspective, in this sense, is the opposite of a dogmatic one.
Time (Infinity) would be a priori. You can't falsify it, neither can you verify it.
10
Religion / Re: A Philosophical Perspective on the Supernatural
« on: January 11, 2010, 10:38:50 pm »
Hehehehihihihohohohohahahaha!
Indeed - you got to!
Indeed - you got to!
11
Humor / Re: YOU LAUGH...... YOU LOSE - Funny Dogs Edition
« on: January 11, 2010, 07:25:17 pm »
6 points. Number 7 made me fall from my chair.
12
Humor / Re: YOU LAUGH...... YOU LOSE - Lolcats Edition
« on: January 11, 2010, 07:24:00 pm »
3 points. I hate cats, seriously - but they are darn funny!
Pages: [1] 2