Aug 3rd 2011 3:22AM Were wotlk and cata trademarked as "world of warcraft: " or just as ""?
Mar 17th 2011 11:40AM Drakkenfyre, if people take that from the article they have to read between the lines a lot. The article is pretty neutral.
And I pretty much read all commemts and your name rings a bell. Generally i believe i don't agree with you, but I respect your clear opinions. This post was uneccesary imho since you give reasons why not to go ftp which are discussed upon in the article.
Anyway, I'm on the fence for ftp. I like free, I don't like unpredictable payments.
Mar 17th 2011 9:36AM Did you even read the article or is this just a hidden "first!" Post?
Your post is a bad rehash of some parts of this article. Downvoted for several reasons.
Feb 2nd 2010 1:24PM Two incredibly good references about time-travelling is just too awesome...
Thanks for laughs. Good thing I'm home alone :)
Jan 3rd 2010 9:47AM Your math is awesome! :)
Nov 29th 2009 5:10AM I was hunting and hunting and hunting for that elusive dwarf rogue (and troll rogue, but I solved that by camping the starting area. BAM new player Turkeyfied! We lost one new player maybe, but I got my title!). Then I ran up to starting area and found one! He was happy that I gave him 25 gold :).
Then it hit me: why wouldn't anyone just go hide somewhere with his dwarf rogue (say: Elwyn Forest) and just advertise his availability for 50 gold? Easy money right? I didnt have the time anymore else I would've tried just that :)
Nov 29th 2009 4:58AM Bah had this whole writeup about paranoia and trust and the interwebz ate it. Long story short: there is 2 sides to the story. I for one can't upfront believe in such a story since it is one-sided and speckled with interpreations (like the one above which I will comment on) and omissions.
"'Intimate' conversations when refered to in this kind of situation are like that.
He was cheating on her with in an internet affair, those things usually snowball and it was a good thing she caught it."
So any 'intimate' conversation I have (what is intimate?) is cheating on my significant other? And those 'things' usually snowball? Into what?
As always, somehow people interpret any relationship men or women have with the other gender as sexual and/or threatening. The problem is with the interpreters. There is more grey area than that.
Grey area or not though, lying about it is never a solution. It can be an explanation for behaviour other than hiding stuff because it's "bad". I've known a girl that was paranoid and her boyfriend loved her a lot. He lied to actually have a relationship with her since she was paranoid... Is he a bad man? Nah, not really.... right?
Nov 2nd 2009 1:59PM Not to be rude but this is bollocks. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.
And also, people do not get judged by the system that is in place but by the people making up (unwritten) rules we like to call society or community. So if the community at large thinks that "need is for needing and greed is for greeding/offspec" than this is simply a ninja.
To try and make an example: I can steal someone's purse easily if they keep it near but not on their table. Should I?
And yes, everyone's chances get hurt. If normally (say) 4 people would roll including the guildy that actually needs it: 1/4 chance. If suddenly 2 other people roll with them and would give it to their guildy: (1+2) / (4+2) = 3/6 chance. The others however would go from 1/4 chance to a 1/6 chance...
It doesn't matter how you justify this, it does not seem to fit in any kind of loot rules that have ever existed, albeit unwritten...
My 2 cents
Feb 17th 2009 9:31AM Two arguments for dual speccing at non-prohibitive costs at a lower level:
- people actually learn a spec that suits the chosen style. Don't forget a lot of us older players have experience with all specs already so healing as ret is not that difficult
- the normal instances (also at lower levels) can be harder as Blizzard doesn't have to keep off-spec healing in their mind when designing instances. It means more difficult enounters in normal (leveling) instances that can't be powered through with the right specs but are hard with off specs at the appropriate level.
It means that I, when leveling my druid, could have a hard time healing in Stockades because both me and the tank are actually able to spec for healing and for solo content. Instead of me not having a hard time because the tank is actually tank specced by choice and takes no damage or has no threat issues whatsoever...
Oh well, it seems unlocking it at lvl 30 or 40 seems best to me :)
Jan 27th 2009 6:14AM Actually the job of the CEO is defined by the goals set to him by his shareholders, commonly in the form of a reward structure like stock options or stock. The goal of shareholders is (almost) always higher market value for their stock, which is defined by the profit in the future. Hence in a perfect world the CEO's goal would be to do investments that increase the value of the firm in the future, which would mainly rely on customer satisfaction and repeat-buying of the product (in this case probably, this is purely my speculation).
But because a lot of reward structures are in fact more short term in nature than long term you might be right. Let's hope Activision's shareholders are smart enough to not put out a short term reward for the CEO ;-)