In reply to this comment by Issykitty:
*promote Siouxsie
Thank you so much for the promote bud! Here is a sift that I think you will enjoy.

Closest obvious WoW reference is 'Evil witch queen' comment at :42, in regards to Sylvanas Windrunner. I'm not sure if he says 'witch' or 'lich', in either case neither is exactly appropriate, as she was a banshee before she became Forsaken.

Point is moot though, he popped evasion at 2:53, sprint at 2:56, and vanish at 3:00. Obviously there was client lag, as the mobs were already running after him without resetting.

>> ^Bullwinkle:
Banshee, stop tossing around the "English grad" thing like it's some kind of major accomplishment. A) English is one of the most common majors and B) Just because you studied literature does not mean you comprehend language.


Right, because writing about 100 formal papers on literature at a major university gives you roughly same exposure to language and its rules as a high school diploma or an Engineering degree. My bad, shouldn't have mentioned it.


As an example, I might point you to the definition of the word "infer."


Yep, mixed up imply/infer and didn't reread my post. Whoopee, what a tame and insanely common mistake. Notice how I can admit where I'm wrong instead of kicking the air like a mule.


No matter how much inflection or nuance or meaning you want to throw at the phrase, "I could care less" structurally does not imply what is intended when it's typically used.


What an amazingly thorough rebuttal, just stubbornly asserting the opposite without addressing the logic of my post. Why would anyone interpret that you cared enough to give a preference unless an actual preference followed? Explain. Your entire argument rests on this. For "I could care less" to imply caring when the opposite was intended, it has to be inferred that way by the person to whom it's spoken.

Banshee, no it's not grammatically incorrect, just technically imprecise.
"I could care less" does NOT convey a degree of caring, that's the whole point. It's ambiguous as to how much the speaker cares. It technically means "I care some." Some unstated amount greater than zero.

I learnt my English in the trenches.

Banshee, stop tossing around the "English grad" thing like it's some kind of major accomplishment. A) English is one of the most common majors and B) Just because you studied literature does not mean you comprehend language.

As an example, I might point you to the definition of the word "infer."

No matter how much inflection or nuance or meaning you want to throw at the phrase, "I could care less" structurally does not imply what is intended when it's typically used.

Banshee, no need to get butthurt. Obviously it's not GRAMMATICALLY incorrect, but the words do not literally convey the meaning that they are intended to convey. If anything, it is as BicycleRepairman said, an ironic/sarcastic rather than literal phrase.

The nub of Banshee's comments are correct. There does not currently exist any form of energy that can replace fossil. The manufacturing, industrial, business, and residential power demands far outstrip 'green' energy's ability to supply power. Even a massive multi-pronged approach using geothermal, wind, tide, solar, methane farms, et al would barely make a dent. If we want to get off coal, we need to move to nuclear. There is no other viable option.

That doesn't even touch the massive expense of green energy. Green energy is not cheap by any stretch. It is actually the MOST expensive energy that exists. In acerage, material, maintainance, production cost, and distribution - green energy is on the order of 5-10 times more expensive than coal depending on which kind you are talking about. So unless you are prepared to quadruple your electic bill, you better pray that coal doesn't go anywhere or that the enviro-nazis untwist thier panties a few notches with nuclear.

Barak Obama said he wasn't going to raise taxes on the middle/lower class. Yet is stated desire to put the coal industry out of business would put an 'energy tax' on all Americans to the tune of several thousand dollars a year.

Thanks to his parents, this kid is going to grow up to be the next 12 inch spike wearing banshee vocalist fronting a band of zombie vikings raised from the dead wreaking deathly noisy havoc amongst all the blood-stained cave dwellers in the bog.

Ahh, the joys of that game + a Voodoo Banshee (for that 3DFX Glide perfection).

/pines for a good DX sequel.

now, more than ever, the possibility that monkeys can not be fully civilized must be questioned. i honestly had hoped that monkeys had the possibility to achieve a state of legitimate human rights. i'm really starting to doubt whether that is true.

clearly, it is possible as some have managed to achieve it, but what is standing in the way for the rest? are there really physiological differences in the brain which prevent this from occurring? i don't want to believe that. is there a mental barrier? the ego? indoctrination? societal pressure?

i'm confused and i don't know what else to conclude. is my message honestly that cryptic and hard to understand? have you tried to check my assertions for yourself, deriving the principles on paper with your own pencil? is it really not working? do you not understand what i am saying because it is hard to understand, or because you aren't really giving it a fair chance? are you simply failing to absorb the information? are we just miscommunicating? is it a poor presentation on my part?

can someone here who agrees with me at least to an extent (banshee maybe?) try to shed some light on the issue? if it is only a mental barrier, than we can overcome it.

i don't know what thought is like for anyone else. i only know how words, phrases, and concepts form and are connected and associated in my brain. i really want to believe that we all have the potential to think the same way. if there are honest, physiological barriers then that is a truly frightening premise.

Thanks The video just reeked of someone sucking every last bit of enjoyment out of life...

In reply to this comment by Peroxide:
Your comment just made my year! holy shit that's funny.

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
And ensure you have a klaxon constantly wailing from somewhere in your clothes
And have a blinding revolving light strapped to your head
And be armed with a semi-automatic handgun in case you are set upon by banshees or werewolves.
And perhaps don't go out at all but just yell 'trick or treat' from your doorstep.
Actually that might carry the risk of being shot from afar, so do it from inside... via a megaphone
And then if you do get any candy, well, don't eat that it might be poisoned.
In fact what the hell are you doing up so late anyway, get back to bed.

Your comment just made my year! holy shit that's funny.

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
And ensure you have a klaxon constantly wailing from somewhere in your clothes
And have a blinding revolving light strapped to your head
And be armed with a semi-automatic handgun in case you are set upon by banshees or werewolves.
And perhaps don't go out at all but just yell 'trick or treat' from your doorstep.
Actually that might carry the risk of being shot from afar, so do it from inside... via a megaphone
And then if you do get any candy, well, don't eat that it might be poisoned.
In fact what the hell are you doing up so late anyway, get back to bed.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
^I don't want to see you calling the fire department when your home catches fire, Señor rugged individualist.


Can you not read or something? I want government funding to the extent that they're preventing the infringement of rights and offering recourse, not "directing industry" with forcibly appropriated money or providing services any more complex than laying pavement. Any fire could be arson, you need a fire department to protect private property. Full-blown state health care addressing self-inflicted conditions with other people's money is garbage.

Ever hear about the guy in Sweden with the brain tumor? The state didn't like his chances and declared it inoperable to save money. He flew to private facility and paid for the operation, and lived for many more years. How kind and wonderful socialist health care is.

Learn what Socialism is.. do you really want to Live in CUBA or Russia? for the next 4 years.

Surely not, but it's worth nothing that economic and political freedom are two completely different things and they don't even have elections in Cuba. And yes, economically, Cuba is even more socialist than we are. Just this year they ALLOWED their citizens to buy computers. People don't risk their lives fleeing to America on rafts and banana boats for nothing, they're trying to escape living life as just another lowest common denominator. They want the opportunity to live, not merely survive in a so-called socialist utopia. Unfortunately, they don't realize the hyperinflationary depression brought on by our socialist interventions they're now stepping into. Out of the frying pan and into the fire, as they might say.

downvote banshee for ignoring what i wrote and telling me the definition of a word.

Are you on drugs or something?!! I totally answered your question. If you aren't socialist, you're capitalist. The terms are a reference to where the majority of the capital is controlled, politicians or its earner. There is no other place for it to be. Just like if you're not feeling good, you're feeling bad. Not anti-good.

YES, THAT MEANS GEORGE BUSH AND NEO-CONS ARE SOCIALISTS, EVEN MORESO THAN CLINTON WHO ENJOYED POPULARITY UNDER THE FED-INDUCED TECH BUBBLE OF THE 90S. Instead of having that bubble burst on Bush's first term and making him a one-term president, he delayed a severe recession by having Greenspan artificially lower interest rates to 1% for an entire year. The inflationary effects of that filtered into real estate. Amazing revelation, here for you?

then you only have one problem left, and for me it's a big one: The Arts. I cannot figure out a way that art can be compatible with capitalism. It doesn't work like that.

It's the complete opposite, art is hurt by socialism. What funds advanced types of art and entertainment like video games and movies is the personal tastes of a private earner who has in his possession excess capital after buying things to merely survive. Socialism could try to provide for that, but tastes vary far too much for a central office to know the millions of places that the capital would have flowed to if it had been spent by its earner. Or even how much is appropriate to distribute to each person. Invariably, there will be people who don't care much about art and just want a bigger family. Do you then take from one person's art fund to finance the cost of those kids? That will gut the art fund very quickly. As will the corruption inherent in having capital controlled by someone who didn't earn it. And when your government is involved in banning computers and censoring speech, good luck with damn near anything.

downvote banshee for ignoring what i wrote and telling me the definition of a word.

imstellar if you believe in socialised national defence, fire, police, legal services, then we are in the same ballpark. as long as you regulate industry to guard against man's greedy instinct to fuck everybody else over (lend them money when they don't have a job, lies in advertising, monopolies, corruption etc).
then you only have one problem left, and for me it's a big one: The Arts. I cannot figure out a way that art can be compatible with capitalism. It doesn't work like that.

And ensure you have a klaxon constantly wailing from somewhere in your clothes
And have a blinding revolving light strapped to your head
And be armed with a semi-automatic handgun in case you are set upon by banshees or werewolves.
And perhaps don't go out at all but just yell 'trick or treat' from your doorstep.
Actually that might carry the risk of being shot from afar, so do it from inside... via a megaphone
And then if you do get any candy, well, don't eat that it might be poisoned.
In fact what the hell are you doing up so late anyway, get back to bed.