Upvote for Barbara's great disappointment at 3:50.

Yes, next time! And there will be a next time...

Don't you worry flower, we'll form a protective ring around you and keep you safe from your ex wife, I won't let her hurt you!

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
I can't tell any old stories about myself, because that would violate the terms of the Witness Protection Program. Maybe some other time.

In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
I am greatly disappointed, this thread was dreamed up with you in mind

http://history.videosift.com/talk/Dragging-Some-Fun-Back-To-The-Sift-Kickin-and-Bitchin

I can't tell any old stories about myself, because that would violate the terms of the Witness Protection Program. Maybe some other time.

In reply to this comment by alien_concept:
I am greatly disappointed, this thread was dreamed up with you in mind

http://history.videosift.com/talk/Dragging-Some-Fun-Back-To-The-Sift-Kickin-and-Bitchin

I am greatly disappointed, this thread was dreamed up with you in mind

http://history.videosift.com/talk/Dragging-Some-Fun-Back-To-The-Sift-Kickin-and-Bitchin

Man that looked great. Disappointing there won't be a finished game

I know you were probably going to add one, but I kinda liked the absence of a HUD - seemed to add to the immersive quality.

Definitely a great looking environment...

although i'm in favor of non-traditional unions--both homosexual *and* polygamous marriage, etc--i guess i see the arguing of *this* particular point to be moot

the point of contention is clearly the *ability* to procreate, rather than the *necessity* of the same

for argument's sake, take a look at the statutes of some u.s. states' vehicle codes...

in illinois, for example, all light trucks have to be registered as payload-bearing vehicles, and are even issued special license plates which depict a lower-case 'b' on the tag

does this mean that driving your light truck in illinois *without* a payload is illegal?

imho, there are stronger arguments in favor of non-traditional marriage than this quasi-strawman

if i had my druthers, we'd SETTLE THIS silly *marriage* issue ONCE AND FOR ALL... meaning that we completely do away with ANY and ALL barriers to ANYONE and EVERYONE, of an appropriate age (whatever that means), marrying for WHATEVER reason

it just seems to me that fighting this very emotional and exhausting political and moral battle *more than once* is inefficient and costly, both in time and money

having researched the history of marriage from its earliest conceptualization up to modern times, the history of the the advent of "romantic love" and its media inculcation over time, as well as the relatively recent disenfranchising (the last 100 years or so) of the rights of young adults--think for a second... if it's *immoral* to deny recognition of a homosexual union, then who are we to say (and why) that, say, two 14-17 year-olds cannot have their "love" recognized without social outcry and parental permission (stop and think of how much progeny has sprung from teenage "marriages" and "procreation" since time immemorial... i find the whole sorry mess to be based largely on ignorance

gay marriage has my support, but i'd be greatly disappointed if all this cacophony were to simply allow this *particular* group to attain satisfaction and *then* draw a moral line *behind* themselves