Dayz and how realistic it is. VERY REALISTIC

[Max Planck 7174]

So was your post a response to the work of TRIBESMAN' date=' BARBARIAN, AND CITIZEN[/url'] by John W. Campbell? You referenced his work, although not directly, and seem to base a few ideas off his writings. I get the feeling your 'article' was an original creation, due to its first person narrative, lack of scientific formatting, and because it doesn't seem to exist anywhere else.

Am I far off with my guess?

I think your guess hit the mark. But he is offline now, hopefully crying with shame.

[hawc 63]

I couldn't read anything because you are a pussy and edited it. If you don't like the game or you suck at it just quietly leave.

[gopher_p 1]

Dude. There's a shift key for a fucking reason.

skipping one or two keys saves me valuable time when i type. i am working on perpetual motion machines and life is already short as it is.

(1) Skipping all of the vowels will also save you time when you type something up' date=' but it would also render the resulting text equally unreadable (though it has been shown that people can read text missing vowels). So either come up with a better excuse or do the reader a favor and write properly. This is an internet form, not your goddamn phone.

(2) Perpetual motion machines are a physical impossibility. You're wasting your time. Use some of it to write properly.

(3) SOURCE. Give us a name, a title, something.

[/quote']

1. yep, i could do it too and your fragile wittle mind would automatically put fill them in when you read it. but that would involve a lot of re writing of hard wired neurons in my brain, and long story short it wouldnt be as fast or efficient.

2. you dont say? i imagine that someone like you who takes things so seriously must rage quit a lot. *pats shoulder* its ok bro, im here for you.

3. why should i do that? none of it is relevant. hence why i cut out all the nasty hating garbage, and... come to think of it, lower case I's lack of proper spelling and grammar??? its almost like i know what a plagiarism is.

if anything your argument is a bit of a double edged sword. do you really think facists and racists arent gonna KOS certain skin colors if the zombie appoc occured? loool.

1. Let's get one thing clear: Try as you might, you are in no position to insult my intelligence. That said, it's ultimately up to you whether or not you want to follow the generally accepted conventions for proper writing.

2. I didn't ragequit. A physicist (an actual physicist ... you know PhD, published in peer-reviewed journals, active in research, etc.) told me that it was impossible in the current model of physics. I believed him. But by all means, continue your work. Just know that there is a difference between "They haven't figured it out yet" and "They've demonstrated that it's not possible".

While you're at it, maybe you can find three natural numbers, none of which is 0 or 1, such that the sum of the cubes of the first two is equal to the cube of the third. I've been told that it can't be done, but it sounds like you're up to the challenge.

3. You should do it because we asked. Let us be the judge regarding it's relevance. We're not asking for a source so that we can judge your work or because we think you've plagiarized, we're asking for a source so that we may judge the original work on it's own merits.

4(?) If you'd like to respond to a post I made in another topic, please do so in the other topic. When doing so, you should be wary of negating claims that I never made, yada yada, strawman arguments and such.

[KOS11 0]

So was your post a response to the work of TRIBESMAN' date=' BARBARIAN, AND CITIZEN[/url'] by John W. Campbell? You referenced his work, although not directly, and seem to base a few ideas off his writings. I get the feeling your 'article' was an original creation, due to its first person narrative, lack of scientific formatting, and because it doesn't seem to exist anywhere else.

Am I far off with my guess?

your close, but no cigar, the article was actually written by someone else, and if im not mistaken in a completely different year etc. if you re read it again, you will no doubt notice references made to the one that you pulled up.

as far as that qwak is concerned, im not even sure what planet he/she/it is on. wiki is not an encyclopedia, and there is billions of dollars invested in drugs for psyciatric care, and according to those same "experts" she works for/preaches 90% of us have issues, and they can all be treated with scripts, just sign on the bottom line.

all i was trying to do is paint a comparison between the authors idea of different types of people in different states of developement as a society, in relation to different states of developement in the game.

thanks for playing, the coffee i went out for is getting cold :D

KOS cause if you dont i will :D

[Max Planck 7174]

as far as that qwak is concerned' date=' im not even sure what planet he/she/it is on. wiki is not an encyclopedia, and there is billions of dollars invested in drugs for psyciatric care, and according to those same "experts" she works for/preaches 90% of us have issues, and they can all be treated with scripts, just sign on the bottom line.

[/quote']

1. You don't like Wikipedia? Try this then: http://assembly.state.ny.us/member_files/125/20020416/

2. I work for a public hospital, we are not allowed to offer any form of treatment unless there is valid experimental evidence of its effectiveness. Remember how you harped on about the scientific method? We actually put it to use.

3. No one is preaching that 90% of us have 'issues'. You made that up.

[Survivor-Kyle 148]

So was your post a response to the work of TRIBESMAN' date=' BARBARIAN, AND CITIZEN[/url'] by John W. Campbell? You referenced his work, although not directly, and seem to base a few ideas off his writings. I get the feeling your 'article' was an original creation, due to its first person narrative, lack of scientific formatting, and because it doesn't seem to exist anywhere else.

Am I far off with my guess?

your close, but no cigar, the article was actually written by someone else, and if im not mistaken in a completely different year etc. if you re read it again, you will no doubt notice references made to the one that you pulled up.

Would you mind posting the author's name and/or article title? I'd like to read more and see how they arrived at their conclusions.

[UbiquitousBadGuy 846]

Closed because lack of focused discussion.