Jump to content


HERO Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by 薔薇語

  1. Again, what were his purjuous statements? La Rose.
  2. If we are honest with themselves you recognize that we don't know. We don't actually know what those phrases mean we have assumptions. And assumptions about facts required us to show a certain level of humility. the judge and his high school friends agree on the meaning of those terms. At some point we have to ask ourselves which passes the Occam's razor test that a group of 17 year old boys created some stupid phrasing for drinking game 30 years or that all of them are lying now and that actually our assumptions are The are assumptions are the unvarnished truth. La Rose.
  3. Who is the Joe with relevant info here? Has anyone in this proceeding said they have relevant info to the sexual assault we haven't heard? It doesn't Seem any of those people wanting to be interviewed are such a person. Perhaps there is a Jack who knows of a John? That was supposed to be the case with Ramirez until TheNewYorker showes that to be untrue. So who else is like that that we haven't heard from? It doesn't seem any of the 40 are either Johns or Jacks. At some point things are just fishing expeditions. La Rose.
  4. Witnesses to the sexual assualts alleged? La Rose.
  5. "I do not know if Brett attacked Christine Blasey Ford in high school or if he sexually humiliated Debbie in front of a group of people she thought were her friends. " So he has no info regarding the actually important sexual misconduct allegations. "Judge Kavanaugh seemed to suggest that my account was not credible because “it was a contentious situation” where I “did not like” the third suitemate. He then referenced a prank I pulled on the third suitemate and some redacted portion of his closed-door questioning by Senate Judiciary Committee staff. It’s true that I played a prank on the third roommate. We were not close. But that relationship has no bearing on my ability to observe Kavanaugh’s behavior then and to describe it now." He had an antagonistic relationship with the judge for a lobg time. So, his big issue he can give info on is that perhaps the judge drank to black out status. Nevermind that is a wholly subjective sense and the conversation above regarding the very subjective nature of 'too much' when regarding acceptable levels of drinking. As to the yearbook points, am I a bit confused here? Wasn't the yearbook from Highschool and this man is a college roommate. That leads me to put less faith in that account and especially in light of otger highschool friends supporting the Judge's assessments. So where does that leave us? Exactly where we started. This person could provide no witness knowledge of the real issue of sexual assault and has nothing substantial to say about anything else. So who is the witness we want interviewed regarding the sexual assault case that we haven't seen yet? La Rose.
  6. Ah. Benghazi 2.0. How relieving it would be to have another of those. La Rose.
  7. As to the FBI investigation, who else should have been talk to regarding the Prof Ford allegation? Prof Ford has made her statements and is still in contact with Senator Grassly regarding her reported evidence that she is unwilling to turn over. Are we expecting her to suddenly change her statements and commit purjury? The Judge has made his statements under oath. Are we expecting him to suddenly change and commit purjury? Everyone we have been lead to believe to be at the party has been talked to and denied knowledge of the allegations. What other witnesses do we reasonably expect? The Ramirez allegations has fallen apart by the NewYorker's own doing. She was never a particularly reliable source and the folks pushing some hearsay claims had their originating source flattly deny it. And Pizza Gate 2.0, aka Avenatti's case never had merit. With respect to the allegation of sexual misconduct, which witness are we lacking? La Rose.
  8. I am not so sure it is as cut and dry as you suggest. This does remind me of a popular-ish saying: 'When you disagree with a conservative, they think you're an idiot. When you disagree with a liberal, they think you're evil.' From personal experience, I nor my frienss have ever been called worse things than when we have disagreed with a left leaning individual. This isn't to say the above isn't the case. Folks on the right, especially the religious right, have made absolutely despicable comments about our fellow citizens. We should keep this in mind but in doing so not forget other examples. La Rose.
  9. What are you saying he committed purjury on? What were his words and what was the actual truth of the matter? La Rose.
  10. A Recent NYTimes article by David Brooks. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/opinion/kavanaugh-hearing-partisan-national-disgrace.html "Commentators and others may have acknowledged uncertainty on these questions for about 2.5 seconds, but then they took sides. If they couldn’t take sides based on the original evidence, they found new reasons to confirm their previous positions. Kavanaugh is too angry and dishonest. He drank beer and threw ice while in college. With tribal warfare all around, uncertainty is the one state you are not permitted to be in. This, of course, led to an upsurge in base mobilization. Persuasion is no longer an important part of public conversation. Public statements are meant to mobilize your mob. Senator Cory Booker can’t just sort through the evidence. He has to get Spartacus-like histrionic in order to whip Democrats toward his presidential candidacy. Kavanaugh can’t just dispassionately try to disprove the allegations made against him. Instead, he gets furious and stokes up culture war rage in order to fire up the Republican base. This leads to an epidemic of bigotry. Bigotry involves creating a stereotype about a disfavored group and then applying that stereotype to an individual you’ve never met. It was bigotry against Jews that got Alfred Dreyfus convicted in 1894. It was bigotry against young black males that got the Central Park Five convicted in 1990. It was bigotry against preppy lacrosse players that led to the bogus Duke lacrosse scandal. This past month we’ve seen thousands of people convinced that they know how Kavanaugh behaved because they know how “privileged” people behave. We’ve seen thousands of people lining up behind Kavanaugh because they know that there’s this vicious thing called “the Left,” which hates them." La Rose.
  11. For me and my games: Long Sword = OAF Obvious because any layman can grasp what it does. Accessible because it can be removed from a character in or out of combat with some version of Disarm. It can not be reasonably hidden in a single phase (Requires a particular set of circumstances to do so) Dagger = Either OAF or IAF. Inobvious would mean it is small and could be concealed in about single phase reasonably. It can also be taken from the user with a Dissrm. An OAF is harder to conceal: it has a peculiar shape, glow, etc. Staff of FireBall that appears like normal staves = IAF A layman would struggle to discern its power at a glance. Even after learning the truth, if it was hidden among other staffs out of sight, a character would require some kind of skill check to find. Staff of FireBall with a burning red orb = OAF It is obvious to even a layman that this is no ordinary staff. They may not know the power wrappes up in it, but can spott it out from others. La Rose.
  12. The disguise kit, however, isn't the thing being concealed. The gun is. That is an import distinction. La Rose.
  13. Concealment with OBVIOUS on it is self defeating. Just because a lim belongs on one power doesn't mean it goes on everything in a compound power. We wouldn't put BEAM on both the RKA and Concealment. La Rose.
  14. To create a gun that is also concealable in a manner reflecting better concealment rolls mechanically, you would simply build a compound power. Part 1 of the compound power would be the range killing attack with all the appropriate limitations, then part two would be a +1/2 with concealment for 2 to 4 points. This means anyone using this weapon, when trying to conceal it, would be able to have a bonus to their role. I would be wary about putting any limitations on it that probably wouldn't make any sense such as Focus. One limitation that does seem appropriate though is "self only", with the self being the weapon. La Rose.
  15. Prof Haidt is a good author and that book is particularly well done. I just recently finished his newest one "The coddling of the American mind". In terms of overlap regarding moral intuitions, Typical Liberals and Typical Libertarians share the most in common, not Conservatives per his research. La Rose.
  16. And what of all the positions the Libertarians take in contrast to the the traditional right of the US? If people think of Libertarians as 'right wing' I worry that they are not really aware of what it means to be Libertarian or Right-wing in the US context or perhaps so far left that even centrists are right wing. And if one is defining 'right wing' as merely 'pro-capitalist' then we need to have a long talk about Le Pen in France cause she is solidly left wing, President Macron is to her Right and the fact that will mean redefining most right wing parties in Europe as solidly left wing. That seems like a bit of a stretch. La Rose.
  17. I am totally with Doc on this. The difference between OAF and IAF is a quarter lim. That point increase is more than reasonable to simulate that greater utility for a specific class of weapons. I also believe similar builds are used for Bricks and Speedsters ala Flash using improvised rocks, etc. as thrown weapons. Inobvious because it is hard to account for all the variety of potential around the character but accessible because it can be taken away or the access to the character mitigated (distancing them from rubble, etc.). This doesn't mean a Cane Gun isn't also an IAF, but resting everything on that single style of application might be a bit too extreme. And even in its case, once it is used, it is fairly obvious that it is a weapon. No one shooting another character with a gun lodged in a cane is fooling anyone as to the nature of the Cane. Just that it is essentially inobvious until used. If the Cane-Focus RKA wants to be so undetectable such that it is hard to recognize it even in use, it needs Invisible-Power-Effects. As a default all power should be visible to at least three senses. For a nornal gun that is Sight (looks like a gun and the muzzle flash), hearing (the bang) and smell (gun powder). Just because one puts on a 'disad' doesn't mean the power also miraculously gains a potentially expensive Advantage as well. That also seems to be a generally accepted standard in the fiction as well. Thanos's and others gems of power are IAF because until they are used there isn't much to indicate to a laymen that they are special. Once used, though, it is understood who the source is and generally what on their person is the source. But to a keen eye, the gems are obviously powerful items, the cane is obviously a gun, and the small gun is obviously hidden in the duster's pocket. La Rose.
  18. Huh? I have only one right wing source I listen to regularly and that person is largely anti Pres. Trump. Most of my news feeds are left wing, Libertarian or broadly centrist. You are of course free to think as you will, but perhaps before claiming someone is in a bubble, you'd be best to learn more about that person. Just a thought. La Rose.
  19. "Libertarians Cover the Polling Spread in 4 Senate Races. It's running strong candidates in toss-up races in a historically tight election year, yet America's third party still finds itself routinely left off polls." https://reason.com/blog/2018/10/03/libertarians-covering-the-polling-spread La Rose.
  20. What? I don't know the story you are referencing. La Rose.
  21. In terms of size of Agricultural production (USD), California is the largest. California is also not producing much in the way of staples (corn, soybean, wheat, rice) because they aren't as profitable. From the USDA's website, though: "Which are the top 10 agricultural producing States? In 2017, the top 10 agricultural producing States in terms of cash receipts were (in descending order): California, Iowa, Texas, Nebraska, Minnesota, Illinois, Kansas, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Indiana. These and related statistics can be found in ERS's Farm Income and Wealth Statistics." Those are 8 flyover states plus two very different "big" state. La Rose.
  • Create New...