Lol. I love watching you argue an immoral stance. Smiley face.

>> ^spaceisbig:

I don't really want to get into this discussion but it bothers me when people bring up the party of historical figures. In the time of Andrew Jackson I do believe the Whig party was actually still around. Yes Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, but his ideology reads as a Democrat's would nowadays. Also, many people consider the time period of Civil Rights in the U.S. a time when the political ideology of the two parties actually swapped.


Too late! You're in the discussion now, pal! No backing out! (<-- winkey smiley face means I kid)

I agree that a lot of what defined Lincoln is what also currently defines a modern Democratic politician. But mostly in terms of a large, centralized federal government versus a union of states with their own individual and self-defined rights. He did, however, suspend habeas corpus and locked up US citizens without trial for sedition. Mainly people in the free press he deemed 'Confederate Sympathizers'.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^tedbater:
>> ^blankfist:
Thanks for making this a race issue.

There's a difference in being racist and making an observation about race. Are most rappers black? If I answer yes, does that make me racist? The irony in this video comes from the fact that it looks like soccer mom just hopped in the car and is fixing to blast Tom Jones. You don't expect the music or the reaction.

Sorry, I put the winking smiley face in that comment so you'd know I was teasing.


Damn you small winky face! You're so small!!

>> ^tedbater:

>> ^blankfist:
Thanks for making this a race issue.

There's a difference in being racist and making an observation about race. Are most rappers black? If I answer yes, does that make me racist? The irony in this video comes from the fact that it looks like soccer mom just hopped in the car and is fixing to blast Tom Jones. You don't expect the music or the reaction.

Sorry, I put the winking smiley face in that comment so you'd know I was teasing.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Come on dude, it's a joke, and a mild one at that. >> ^blankfist:
Stefan Molyneux is my favorite? I think your interpretation of me is about as accurate as The Social Network was about the events surrounding the creation of facebook.



Hence my smiley face.

I'm implying that legality is not a perfect measure of harm. My point here is that the thing which is illegal in this situation is minimally harmful, and that the perfectly legal action taken in this situation (that is, the Westboro Baptist Church expressing their views) is quite harmful.
In response to your statement that illegal action implied harm, I stated other examples of instances in which the legality of an action did not reflect the harm it created. Sorry if that was not obvious to you.
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^Faye2441:
Is J-walking with no cars in sight harmful? is drawing a smiley face on a dollar bill harmful? Was oral sex any more harmful prior to 2003 than it is now? If you think that legality is a perfect measure of harm, I wonder what exactly you are suggesting?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Isn't illegal action implying harm? What exactly are you suggesting?

So you are saying you want to draw smiley faces on her then, or are you just creating a straw man to not answer the question?

>> ^Faye2441:

Is J-walking with no cars in sight harmful? is drawing a smiley face on a dollar bill harmful? Was oral sex any more harmful prior to 2003 than it is now? If you think that legality is a perfect measure of harm, I wonder what exactly you are suggesting?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Isn't illegal action implying harm? What exactly are you suggesting?


So you are saying you want to draw smiley faces on her then, or are you just creating a straw man to not answer the question?

Is J-walking with no cars in sight harmful? is drawing a smiley face on a dollar bill harmful? Was oral sex any more harmful prior to 2003 than it is now? If you think that legality is a perfect measure of harm, I wonder what exactly you are suggesting?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Isn't illegal action implying harm? What exactly are you suggesting?

We're cool. I figured it was a plural you, but I wanted to double-check.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
It wasn't directed at you personally at all; the 'you' was intended as an unspecified subject pronoun. Rest assured that nothing in your description caused my downvote. Everything in my comment was directed at the video itself. I'm glad you share some of my concerns about it. I have just seen too many unfounded claims about miracle cures to accept that this particular video brings anything new and valuable into the discourse. Peace
>> ^curiousity:

>> ^Ornthoron:
Oh, another cure for cancer. Sorry, but you're only hurting the cause of marijuana legalization by drawing conclusions from one man's anecdote about his skin cancer being cured. I could let that pass without a downvote, hadn't it been for the completely irresponsible advise to drop chemotherapy in favour of an as yet unproven snake hash oil treatment. Add to that the normal conspiracy buzzwords about Big Pharma, and this is far into woowoo land.

Eh? Who's the "you"? Who's drawing conclusions? Perhaps there is some confusion because I used the title of the YouTube video? (I did add the "(cancer)" so that the gist of the video is more readily understandable by viewing the title only.) Hopefully my joking about inserting a Big Pharma rant, etc in my description didn't add to your dislike of the video... I did put a smiley face at the end to show I was joking around about that line.
I see it as a man that tried an alternative and it worked for him. I guess I missed the explicit advice to drop chemotherapy. One point I had a problem with was when the guy started talking about how the hash oil was pulling the cancer out of him... I have a hard time believing that. Hopefully this man continues to see a doctor to ensure the cancer is in remission/gone.

It wasn't directed at you personally at all; the 'you' was intended as an unspecified subject pronoun. Rest assured that nothing in your description caused my downvote. Everything in my comment was directed at the video itself. I'm glad you share some of my concerns about it. I have just seen too many unfounded claims about miracle cures to accept that this particular video brings anything new and valuable into the discourse. Peace
>> ^curiousity:

>> ^Ornthoron:
Oh, another cure for cancer. Sorry, but you're only hurting the cause of marijuana legalization by drawing conclusions from one man's anecdote about his skin cancer being cured. I could let that pass without a downvote, hadn't it been for the completely irresponsible advise to drop chemotherapy in favour of an as yet unproven snake hash oil treatment. Add to that the normal conspiracy buzzwords about Big Pharma, and this is far into woowoo land.

Eh? Who's the "you"? Who's drawing conclusions? Perhaps there is some confusion because I used the title of the YouTube video? (I did add the "(cancer)" so that the gist of the video is more readily understandable by viewing the title only.) Hopefully my joking about inserting a Big Pharma rant, etc in my description didn't add to your dislike of the video... I did put a smiley face at the end to show I was joking around about that line.
I see it as a man that tried an alternative and it worked for him. I guess I missed the explicit advice to drop chemotherapy. One point I had a problem with was when the guy started talking about how the hash oil was pulling the cancer out of him... I have a hard time believing that. Hopefully this man continues to see a doctor to ensure the cancer is in remission/gone.

>> ^Ornthoron:

Oh, another cure for cancer. Sorry, but you're only hurting the cause of marijuana legalization by drawing conclusions from one man's anecdote about his skin cancer being cured. I could let that pass without a downvote, hadn't it been for the completely irresponsible advise to drop chemotherapy in favour of an as yet unproven snake hash oil treatment. Add to that the normal conspiracy buzzwords about Big Pharma, and this is far into woowoo land.


Eh? Who's the "you"? Who's drawing conclusions? Perhaps there is some confusion because I used the title of the YouTube video? (I did add the "(cancer)" so that the gist of the video is more readily understandable by viewing the title only.) Hopefully my joking about inserting a Big Pharma rant, etc in my description didn't add to your dislike of the video... I did put a smiley face at the end to show I was joking around about that line.

I see it as a man that tried an alternative and it worked for him. I guess I missed the explicit advice to drop chemotherapy. One point I had a problem with was when the guy started talking about how the hash oil was pulling the cancer out of him... I have a hard time believing that. Hopefully this man continues to see a doctor to ensure the cancer is in remission/gone.

Give him ten more needles and see if he can make a smiley face.

Games that Issy likes

-Pain - Slingshot a dude into different hazardous environments. It's sick, funny and strangely satisfying.
-Echochrome - MC Escher: The Game
-Lumines - A hip and addictive take on Tetris
-Chime - (not yet on PS3) is another puzzle game with some nice music
-Pacman CE and DX - Pacman on X
-Rockband/Rockband Beatles - Good times.

She also got a couple of hours of enjoyment out of the free PS3 virtual space 'Home', but it's pretty lame overall.


Other recommendations

-Little Big Planet - Fun for two players with tons of clever user generated content.
-Heavy Rain - an extremely exiting interactive movie, but unlike most interactive movies, this one doesn't suck.
-Flower - beautiful and unique gaming experience. I wish there were more games like this.
-LocoRoco Coccoricco - a weird Japanese game, where you are a butterfly trying to coax these little smiley faces to follow you. Very unique gameplay and design.

Minecraft is also a one man team Though I believe he is now expanding a little due to the enormous success.

Though yes, it is a great world to have both these games sparking creativity in people whom otherwise would not show it. I've never been able to get in to DF but I've read some great stories of people's experiences. One that I'll remember forever, was a story that had an action packed encounter with an elephant, then I looked at a screenshot of that situation and it was like a little ASCII smiley face, meeting a '@' symbol (I think). I just burst out laughing for a good while, even now it gives me a chuckle haha. What people can imagine from such basic graphics, brilliant

>> ^d00kie:

Minecraft has always struck me as a 3D and First Person version of Dwarf Fortress (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/) (For a more user-friendly version of DF i'd suggest a tileset such as the Phoebus set which should be available here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=57557.0) which I'd also strongly recommend.
That said, Dwarf Fortress does have a difficulty curve similar to a brick wall, but with a bit of persistence it's really very rewarding, and the sheer freedom offered is quite astounding. Options range from simple fortress defence, through to training Magmanauts to search volcanos, to fully self-aware fortresses using the highest standard of dwarf-puting!
While I don't know the scale of the production team for Minecraft, I have to admit that I've always been impressed with DF especially as the entire production team is one bloke and his cat...
Either way, I'm glad that Minecraft has recaptured people's imaginations to start puttering around in an environment where virtually anything is possible. Muchos Kudos to them all.

Upvote for the cocaine smiley face.