Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Gorum

Irontruth's page

4,790 posts (4,792 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,790 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Sissyl wrote:

thejeff: What this kind of rules does is, even if you discount what Kelsey wrote, that it puts two prospective lovers in a situation where the question of trust becomes even more difficult than it already is. I saw an article some time ago stating that many young people choose to film their sessions of intercourse to have something to fall back on if it should become a legal matter. See, the alternative is to have nothing at all. Add in prohibitions of filming people younger than seventeen and various other laws, and it seems to me that there are a number of politicians who want it to be impossible for people to feel secure in having sex before they are eighteen. At least in states where age of consent is below eighteen, this feels like a very odd situation.

Also, no. If you are claiming this change is a good one, it falls to YOU to explain how we should see the fact that false accusations will lead to more convictions with the new rules. You can't turf that over to someone else and then wash your hands of it. Changes like this WILL lead to more people who have been falsely accused getting sentenced. Is that okay? What do we say to that? I am waiting for an answer.

And no, sanity doesn't in general enter into this. As I told you in another thread, we had a politician actually campaigning to remove trials in cases of rape - because it was so emotionally tough for the victim. You have been accused of rape, go directly to jail, do not collect 200$. Given this, and the fact that people accused of rape will under laws like this have to prove their innocence, no, this is a development that is gravely unhealthy.

And it doesn't matter if you claim not to say that it doesn't matter if innocents are sentenced and punished. It is the sum of what you say.

This is the law in question.

If you could please read it, then quote the passage that deals with criminal cases of sexual assault or rape.

You're talking a lot about how this impacts criminal cases, so I'm sure you can find a passage in this law that deals with criminal cases.

Hint

Spoiler:
there isn't one.

The law is about post-secondary education institutions and guidance no how they handle cases of reported rape or sexual assault on their campus. It has nothing to do with the police.

Quote:


(1) An affirmative consent standard in the determination of whether consent was given by both parties to sexual activity. “Affirmative consent” means affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity. It is the responsibility of each person involved in the sexual activity to ensure that he or she has the affirmative consent of the other or others to engage in the sexual activity. Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent. Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and can be revoked at any time. The existence of a dating relationship between the persons involved, or the fact of past sexual relations between them, should never by itself be assumed to be an indicator of consent.

(2) A policy that, in the evaluation of complaints in any disciplinary process, it shall not be a valid excuse to alleged lack of affirmative consent that the accused believed that the complainant consented to the sexual activity under either of the following circumstances:

(A) The accused’s belief in affirmative consent arose from the intoxication or recklessness of the accused.

(B) The accused did not take reasonable steps, in the circumstances known to the accused at the time, to ascertain whether the complainant affirmatively consented.

An actual rapist just has to change their story for this law. He just has to say "I asked her if she wanted to have sex, she said yes. I asked again if she was enjoying and wanted to continue, she said yes." It is now entirely his word against hers again. The law doesn't actually change or force ANYTHING in regards to guilt or innocence, it merely changes the words that will be successful to avoid punishment from an administrative body (not a law enforcement organization, since this law has nothing to do with law enforcement, like the police).

Really what the law does is standardize how educational institutions will judge and evaluate sexual assault and rape reports on their campus, nothing more. It doesn't create some sort of new burden of proof, it just clarifies what kind of verbal arguments are NOT allowed.

An analogy:

You leave something on the front step of your house.
I take it.
You accuse me of stealing it.
I say that you regularly leave things on your front step for me to take, so clearly this was an implied consent between the two of us.

That defense is no longer valid according to this law. Instead I just say "We talked at the mailbox the day before and you told me you'd leave it for me to take."

Seriously, being up in arms over this is the silliest thing IMO.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I want to see statistics on false rapes. Don't just link them though, I want someone to explain to me how this is a BIGGER problem than say... the 60% of rapes that go unreported.

Story about women in the military who were fired for reporting that they were raped. These accusations were not proven false.

Teen attempts suicide after being bullied for reporting her rape.

A similar story, she was gangraped, they posted photos online and she tried to kill herself. It put her in a comma and eventually taken off life support.

Another teen who committed suicide after being bullied after her rape.

Three boys undress a passed out girl, rape her, photograph it. She committed suicide after the images were posted and she was bullied.

Woman raped at gunpoint, gets thrown in jail and fired from her job.

False accusations do happen, and I agree, they are tragic. The system does need to change though and I'm sure mistakes will be made. I won't take you seriously if you think that false accusations are the biggest problem involved with this topic though. The bigger problem is that very large numbers of rapists go free and even more are never even reported to the system.

Also, a major problem is bullying of rape victims. Even if their case isn't proven yet, there needs to be no bullying, or retaliation against them UNTIL a false accusation with intent is proven. One way to start is to stop perpetuating the myth that false accusations are a widespread problem.

This doesn't mean we automatically assume she's telling the truth and he's guilty. Rather, we should stop making assumptions about people who aren't us.


Necromancer wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Left unsaid here is that this only applies to administrative college actions, not to actual rape trials. No criminal penalties are at stake. That makes me a lot less concerned about shifting the burden of proof. It's not a criminal trial. That's where the whole "beyond a reasonable doubt" thing comes in.

An accusation of sexual assault (let alone an accusation of rape) can ruin someone's career before it even begins. If someone's expelled from a college after a biased hearing, there's a good chance they won't get into other colleges if that knowledge follows them. This is in addition to wasting the accused student's time and money.

Above all, it's simply not right to do this to innocent students. False accusations should be punished just as severely whether they go to criminal courts or college disciplinary hearings.

Are you aware that often times women face social backlash that ruins THEIR careers just for reporting a rape? Even rapes that are real.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:

I agree with a lot of that of that article, the second to last paragraph though. You cannot make people care. And comparing the Obama re-election year with the municipal election turnout? That's a joke. How comparing the 2004 turnouts, or even the 2010 turnouts.

I, of course, think voting is for ninnies. I was just wondering how many disenfranchised felons there are in Ferguson.

Probably a lot, since you can be found guilty of damage to government property, even after an officer admits on the stand that he lied and you didn't actually damage anything.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:


Musical Interlude Included

"Justice Brennan/Take out some insurance on me, ooh baby"

Wugazi - Ghetto Afterthought

Wugazi is an album worth of mashups of Wu-Tang Clan and Fugazi. It's possibly the most amazing thing ever (okay, not really, but I do like it a lot).


Vod Canockers wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

IIRC, voter turn out was something like 12%?

Most Ferguson residents didn't vote for him, Vod.

No the turnout was over 50%, and yes less than half the registered voters voted for him, but that was still over 9000 people that did vote for him, and almost 300000 in St. Louis County.

PRECINCTS COUNTED (OF 23) . . . . . 23 100.00%
REGISTERED VOTERS - TOTAL . . . . . 21,535
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL. . . . . . . 11,250
VOTER TURNOUT - TOTAL . . . . . . 52.24%

PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
(Vote for ) 1
(WITH 23 OF 23 COUNTED)
ROBERT P. McCULLOCH (DEM) . . . . . 9,749 99.12%
NO CANDIDATE FILED . . . . . . . 0
INVALID WRITE-IN . . . . . . . . 87 .88%

So only 87 bothered to write in a name, and a total of 1501 didn't vote for him. that is only 13% of those voting.

Township results looking through those, most of the Democrat heavy areas voted about the same as Ferguson. Most of the Republican heavy areas voted at about 67% (rough estimates) for McCulloch. I would blame that on a straight party vote, but Missouri no longer allows that. Every one of those 9,749 votes were marked by a voter.

What is your point?

That he must be okay because people voted for him?

Bashar al-Assad got 88% of the vote with 73% turnout, he must be the best president ever!

That's a ridiculous argument. Instead, why not dig up an actual piece of information that shows he's a good DA. I dare you to find evidence that McCulloch doesn't automatically side with the police against minorities, even when the police are obviously abusing their power. (see bloody uniform story above)


Also, something that's bugging me....

indite = archaic word for writing or composing words
indict = to charge with a crime


3 people marked this as a favorite.
HangarFlying wrote:

So basically you're saying that the officer should be locked up even if the evidence indicates that he shouldn't be...because the mob is always right?

You have to have faith in the system because if no one does, then the system no longer works. It's certainly not perfect, and there are systemic issues that need to be addressed, but it's important to remember that there are two sides to every story and both have a right to be heard.

If you're unfamiliar with Robert McCulloch (the district attorney in charge of all of this), here's an example.

A man who got lost on his way to work pulled over to look at a map. A police officer ran the plate and saw that he had the same name as someone who had a warrant for his arrest (different middle names though). The police officer arrested him.

While in custody, having been searched and placed in a cell, the cameras viewing that cell were disabled. During that time, 4 police officers entered the cell, held him down and beat him. Oh, they also handcuffed him during the beating too.

Since the man wasn't actually wanted for any sort of crime, the officers decided to charge him with destruction of government property, he got blood on their uniforms. Four counts, one for each set of uniforms.

Later, the man sued the officers for damages, since he was wrongfully detained and beaten. On the witness stand the officer who wrote the complaint admitted that he HAD NO BLOOD on his uniform. He was asked if he submitted the report, he said yes. I was asked a second time if his answer previously about the blood was correct and he affirmed it.

Robert McCulloch, after an officer admitted to lying in an official police report on the stand, dropped 2 of the 4 charges.

McCulloch has NEVER charged a police officer with any sort of wrongdoing when they have killed black men and he's been the DA since 1991 (there have been multiple shootings, a couple under questionable circumstances). Prosecutors have a heavy hand in dealing with grand juries, that's basically who they receive all of their instructions and information from.

Yes, prosecutors work with police and need a good working relationship, but at the same time if the cops do something wrong, he needs to go after them just as hard, not protect them and automatically take their side.

Robert McCulloch wrote:
To denigrate the men and women of the county police department is shameful

That was his opinion during the worst of the protests in Ferguson. He though the police department was handling everything fine.


Mythender (free download from the Paizo site)

It's my favorite game of all time. I heard a phrase once "You GM the games you wish you could play", which is true for me, because I always get to run this.

It's one of the more violent and brutal games I've played, even though players rarely die (I've killed probably a dozen over the years, but only 2 stayed dead). I always manage to get one player to turn into a god though (which is a bad thing, it represents joining the dark-side, loss of free will and oppression of the masses).

In my 20 years of gaming, this game is the closest to producing fights that feel like epic back and forths. I describe a fight scene against a god like an on-the-spot first draft of the Avengers final fight scene. It isn't polished, cause hey we're making this up as we go along at the table, but it has that kind of feel and intent.


I'm down for some afternoon gaming. Have a dinner for other friends with birthdays that evening.


What's the goal?

Do you want all characters to have identical stats?
Less variation between stats?

Are you just trying to encourage a different style of gaming?


Can we circle back to the original point?


Better for Kickstarter.

Basically the terms of use don't actually do anything to guarantee anything for the backer or provide any form of redress should a project fail. Note that in the terms of service, it is implied that Kickstarter will take no action to recover money from failed projects, but rather that project creators may be open to legal action from backers trying to recover funds. It is further enshrining the company (Kickstarter) as being inherently unconnected to the issue and preventing any action from being taken against them.

Kickstarter should not be viewed as a "safe" place to buy things. The more Kickstarter promotes this viewpoint, while not actually taking any steps to enforce it, the more people will feel let down when projects fail.

Notice that Kickstarter doesn't have to return any of THEIR money from the project. Kickstarter takes 5% off the top. If you refund a backer, Kickstarter keeps their 5%, thereby increasing the financial burden on the project creator.

Plus the 3-5% that Amazon takes.

Kickstarter took home $6 million in commission in 2012. I believe the projected number for 2014 is closer to $20 million. The website itself is estimated at being worth just under $1 billion.

If Kickstarter was actually concerned with the success of projects or appeasing backers of failed projects, they would put their money where their mouth is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My favorite pantheon is from Midnight.


Aranna wrote:

But the real question is are the people who have to pay for that pay increase cool with it? Because the middle class are the ones we should ask if this is ok. They are the ones who will pay higher prices without an increase in wages.

This is an attitude of "I got mine Jack, hands off".

Your point is that those who have money should be allowed to wall off their economic standing and refuse improvement to those below them.

Should the wealthy get to decide that the middle class can't increase their incomes?


I'm looking forward to Cloudsplitter. Despite my pacifist tendency, John Brown is one of my favorite people in American history. Not purely for what he did, but how his interpretation is basically a litmus test for how a historian views American history in general. Lies My Teacher Told Me was my first introduction to him (outside a text book) and I've always felt that book was a well-written analysis of how history is taught in America. Not a complete analysis, but a good overview/introduction to the concept.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Comrade Pravda wrote:


I think someone else mentioned it several thousand posts ago, but I just read The Given Day by Dennis Lehane.

A book about Boston, race and class war? I wonder who might've recommended that?

Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:

I'm not a big Lehane fan, but being a proud trade unionist and a communistically-inclined ex-Bostonian, I've got to give a shout out for The Given Day.

Random historical stuff from that book that was sure to turn me into a fan:

** spoiler omitted **

While reading the book I had no internet access, but I was 100% you'd probably already read it.

In the commentary for Season 4 of The Wire (schools), someone involved with the show is talking about how they got reactions from the general public of incredulity about how bad schools were. Like it couldn't possibly be as bad as they were portraying it. When those same people heard back from teachers at inner city schools, they got universal praise for "telling it like it is" but often also got comments that they had toned down the truth and that it was actually worse. The writer comments that they felt like they had to tone it down some, otherwise no one would believe them.

It feels a little bit to me like Lehane did that too with the racism and class injustice. He portrays some shocking scenes for the modern viewer, all of which would be completely believable for the time period, yet he also held back because many modern readers would find the truth unbelievable.


gran rey de los bacon wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
My Benton's hickory smoked bacon arrived while I was on vacation. My roommate graciously put it in the fridge for me and amazingly didn't steal any. I'm not sure if I'm gracious enough to share though.
How clever is your roommate? Perhaps he carefully cut open the package, removed the bacon, cooked and ate it, then replaced it with some tofu-bacon and resealed the bag so well that you can't tell that he did anything.

Fearing this might be the case I randomly selected a package (1d4) and cooked myself 3 slices. It's definitely real bacon.

Hickory smoked deliciousness. It's like eating a campfire, in a good way.

They hand rub the bacon with their mixture of salt, brown sugar and pepper (it's very light on the last two). Let it cure/age, then smoke it over a hickory fire (burning hickory wood being the heat source, not wood chips to add extra smoke).

The meat is super tender and comes apart nicely. The fat rendered a decent amount of grease and is chewy, without being too chewy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The comments about GenCon, something to consider:

Regardless of the growth/diminishing of the RPG customer base compared to 1980 you have a couple of external factors that are more impactful to GenCon attendance.

1) Gamers have gotten older as a whole. There were certainly 40+ year-old gamers back in 1980, but their number has dramatically increased as a proportion of the overall gamer population.

2) Older people have more disposable income for things like spending a weekend in a distant city participating in your hobby. Teenagers rarely have the $500 to $2000 needed the single weekend (or scale that down to 1980 dollars if needed) of gaming at GenCon.

Basically, it boils down to gamers as a whole are wealthier now than they were 30 years ago. This isn't to say that gaming causes you to be wealthier, but rather that older people tend to have more money than younger people and so an aging population means that a higher % of it will have more money to spend on specific products or activities.


I think someone else mentioned it several thousand posts ago, but I just read The Given Day by Dennis Lehane. It has a hefty page count but goes by pretty quick. It explores the historical events of Boston around 1918-1919, you're introduced to characters just as WW1 is ending and ends around the time that Babe Ruth is traded to the Yankees.

It's fairly well written, though one of the main characters, Danny Coughlin, was a bit too liked by the other characters for my tastes. His sense of fairness and justice felt almost unnatural, but it wasn't majorly distracting.

Trigger Warning

Spoiler:
Also a little disturbing is that a scene involving sex with a minor is portrayed as a consenting affair, instead of the rape/assault that it was. Historically, the rape started when she was 11 y/o and he was forcing her to take ether so she couldn't resist.

Overall it was a good read though. I enjoy works that at least try to engage with some of the more uncomfortable aspects of our past, such as racism and class warfare, even if they don't necessarily show either in as harsh a light as really happened.

Next up is Cloudsplitter, a fictional narrative from the point of view of Owen Brown, John Brown's (the famous abolitionist) 3rd son. He was the last surviving member of the raid on Harper's Ferry.


My Benton's hickory smoked bacon arrived while I was on vacation. My roommate graciously put it in the fridge for me and amazingly didn't steal any. I'm not sure if I'm gracious enough to share though.


Chief Cook and Bottlewasher wrote:
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:

Quite fond of Glenfiddich and Jura (the ones I've tasted, at least - haven't tried them all).

I take it neat, preferably at room temperature. You get so much more taste than if you cool it down.

I'm really in the 'adding water/ice is sacrilege' camp, but I try to be polite. Perhaps if I wasn't drinking a good single malt, but then I'd probably pass anyway

I always try them with water first, then a little water (maybe 1/10) and see how it changes. Some I like neat, some get water.

Also, don't skip blends just because they're blends. Some blends are amazing. The best description I've heard for the difference is that singles are a mile deep in flavor profile, while blends are a mile wide. Both have their advantages.


Just got out of the BWCA (6 days of wilderness) and enjoying a Bent Paddle Black Ale. A very dark porter, almost but not quite to stout smoothness territory. Its no Silver City Panther Lake, but its pretty good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yoshida Brothers - Rising

Someone else - Don't know if they're a group or not, doesn't really say, but there are a couple artists listed, might lead you somewhere.

Wagakki Band - Tengaku


Last week a good friend realized he had too much alcohol in his house (not all of it fit in his liquor cabinet), so he gave me 2 bottles, a bottle of Jameson (someone who didn't know much about whiskey gave him a bottle, but I'm not complaining, it's free) and a bottle of Caol Ila 12.

Caol Ila 12 yr
It's very typical of an Islay single malt IMO. Lots of earthy type flavors, smoke and peat. A little bit like wet smoldering grass. I like it. It's fairly smooth and mellow. Nothing really jumps out and assaults you, but it passes through and leaves it's mark.

I'm heading up to the BWCA (canoe wilderness camping) and a flask of this will be my companion. Only one of us will return to civilization (I'm hoping it's me).


No clue, I don't have a copy. Someone else ran the game. I would think that this version is all black and white and probably limited in scope for the art, it's not the final game but a preview/test version. It sounds like there will be a kickstarter at some point in the future, when I have no clue though.


Is there any evidence that this article is being used to enact new laws?


Some US government statistics on human trafficking.

As we all know, government is inefficient, so it's doubtful that these statistics represent the whole of the problem.


I played Epyllion this weekend. It's a Apocalypse Powered game, so if you've played something like Dungeon World, Apocalypse World, Sixth World or Monsterhearts, you're familiar with the basic mechanics.

If you're not familiar, this game has a couple of interesting aspects about play style.

1) It's good for off-the-cuff play. Aspects of the rules require questions to be answered during play. It helps to have a good general idea of what is going on to help answer these questions, but some answers come from players, so you need to be able to handle curve-balls.

2) Mentioned at the end of 1, players get to make up things about the game and the fiction that are not directly related to their character. The nice thing is that means the DM (DragonMaster in this game) doesn't need to have the creative juices to invent EVERYTHING. They do need to have the juices to react to what the players say/do though.

The game takes obvious cues from My Little Pony. You start off as young dragons who are new to the world and learning your way in it. You have connections to the Moons (sources of magic) and have to pick a Virtue to epitomize. The game quickly takes a turn for the dark though, literally. An ancient evil called the Darkness (no, not the band) is returning to Dragonia and you must help protect all dragon-kind from it.

A couple interesting mechanical things:

1) There are no moves for violence with dragons. Dragons don't fight each other, they argue, cajole, promise, compromise, etc. There's lots of moves that deal with dragons interacting with dragons, just not violence.

2) Each dragon has a resource, Gems. Your own Gems don't do anything for you, you can't power any move with them. What you can do is give them to your friends. You can use the Gems you've gained from others to power magic, or use the Help/Hinder move. Some moves you just roll +Gems, other moves require you to return one or more Gems. Whenever someone does something that exemplifies your Virtue (your judgement) you can give them one of your gems.

Ex: I have the Bravery virtue.
My friend charges ahead of the group to attack a Shadow.
Shadows are dangerous, so I think that's a brave thing to do and give him one of my Gems.

The game isn't finished yet. The available version is kind of a beta-version (or ashcan in the publishing industry). It still needs some polish to the overall game, but I still really enjoyed our first session. Once I can get the full game, this is going into my grab-bag of games to have ready for a spur of the moment session.


Vod Canockers wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

Yes, but the difference in consumer prices is 6%.

The difference in pay is over 80%.

Convince me poor people would...

Consumer Prices in United States are 29.60% lower than in Denmark.

Since when does 29.6% = 6%?

Add in the much higher taxes, that start at a lower amount of pay. That incredible pay rate is rapidly disappearing. Add in union dues.

You still haven't explained how a poor person is better off making LESS money.

And I was looking at the Copenhagen vs New York when I cited the 6%. Which is accurate. Stop dancing around the point though, convince me being paid less for the exact same job is better.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Scythia wrote:


Depression is depression, that's a simple statement, but very accurate. It's diagnosed by presentation of symptoms, not by cause.

Yes, but part of the problem is that diagnosis is not treatment.... and, as been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, not all patients respond equally to the same treatment.

Quote:
The discussion of internal vs. external cause seems like an unnecessary attempt to discredit ideas.

Not really. It's an attempt to understand the various causes of depression in an effort to understand and predict what sort of treatments will work better on any given patient.

Stating that "depression is depression" is, frankly, not very helpful, because there are nearly as many different conditions that present as depression as there are that present as fever.

I don't think "depression is depression".

I think that the external/internal is a false division. There are different types of depression, but those aren't two of them.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Irontruth wrote:


How is depression from an "external" source inherently different from depression from an "internal" source?
As an analogy, the same way your blood sugar can vary depending upon what you eat, but also upon the degree of effectiveness of your pancreas and liver.

I'm not asking for an analogy or your opinion.

You asked how it works, and I answered you. I can recommend a number of neurobiology courses if you want to learn about changes in serotonin receptors.
No, I didn't ask how it works.

You know, the question you asked is quoted above. It was answered.

If you want to move the goalposts because you didn't like the answer you received,... that's your perogative, of course. But don't try to pretend that your question wasn't answered.

I haven't moved the goal posts at all. Someone made a claim, I'm asking for proof.

I don't want your opinion or an analogy. I get WHAT you're trying to say. I just don't believe it to be true. Do you have evidence to share that shows serotonin is different in people who have "internal depression" compared to people who have "external depression"?

Right now, it sounds like an assumption that someone just made up because it "makes sense" to them. Just because it "makes sense" to them is not EVIDENCE that it is true.

My own personal experience runs contrary to the claim that was made that "external depression" and "internal depression" are different. So it doesn't "make sense" to me. I'm willing to change my mind, but I would like to see some evidence first.

Do you have any to share?


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Irontruth wrote:


How is depression from an "external" source inherently different from depression from an "internal" source?
As an analogy, the same way your blood sugar can vary depending upon what you eat, but also upon the degree of effectiveness of your pancreas and liver.

I'm not asking for an analogy or your opinion.

You asked how it works, and I answered you. I can recommend a number of neurobiology courses if you want to learn about changes in serotonin receptors.

No, I didn't ask how it works. It's not that far back here's a link to my post if you need it. I asked for proof of the assertion that the internal/external causes of depression create different kinds of depression that operate differently......

Can you provide evidence of this or not?

Because if you're claiming that treatment works on one source of depression and not on another, you are claiming that they're different in nature. If they're different, that difference can be measured and shown.

I'm asking for some place where that measuring has been done. If it hasn't been measured, then to make that claim is only that, a claim. It's not a fact.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Irontruth wrote:


How is depression from an "external" source inherently different from depression from an "internal" source?

As an analogy, the same way your blood sugar can vary depending upon what you eat, but also upon the degree of effectiveness of your pancreas and liver.

If you eat a potato, your blood sugar will spike, but that's not usually an issue. If your blood sugar is elevated when you've not eaten anything all day, that's an issue. But if you eat enough high-carb food (and spike your blood sugar high enough/often enough), you will cause chemical changes in your pancreas and liver that will cause them to behave differently, differently enough to push you into that second group.

That's why early-stage type 2 diabetes can be controlled by lifestyle changes, but sometimes it progresses to the point where insulin supplements are necessary. Similarly, early-stage depression caused by external factors can be controlled by CBT, up to a point.

On the other hand, if you simply don't produce the right chemicals, no amount of talk therapy or diet change is going to help much.

I'm not asking for an analogy or your opinion.

I'm asking for evidence.


Alex Smith 908 wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

You're claiming that certain feelings, depending on HOW they were caused, have nothing to do with chemicals in the brain?

Do you have any proof of this?

As far as I'm aware, this is a fundamental process of why we feel things. For example, petting a dog is external, but it causes your brain to release oxytocin in your brain which increases feelings of trust and love. The same process happens to both mother and infant while breastfeeding.

The brain is a collection of chemical producers and receptors. This fact is one of the fundamental processes by which it accomplishes things.

If you're going to claim otherwise, I'm going to ask you for evidence.

I just posted the explanation. If something is altering the chemistry from an external source like abuse then external medication like therapy can be effective. However if the problem is persistent and internal like a brain that fails to manufacture certain emotion causing chemicals you need to fix the chemical production. It's fundamentally the same as the difference between someone having a stomach ache because of eating gross food and someone having a stomach ache due to an ulcer.

Again, I'm asking you to provide proof.

How is depression from an "external" source inherently different from depression from an "internal" source?

Depression is still depression. It's a problem with various chemicals in the brain, such as dopamine and serotonin. You're claimining that the SOURCE of the problem changes the fundamental nature of how the brain is fucntioning. I'm asking you to provide PROOF of your claim. All you did right there was repeat your claim. Repeating a claim is not proof of said claim.

Example:

Me: I am a time traveler.
You: Prove it, tell me something about the future.
Me: I did prove it, I said "I am a time traveler."

Prove to me that depression from an external source behaves differently than depression caused from an internal source. Don't just repeat the claim. Show me something that backs up your claim.


Vod Canockers wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Denmark mcdonalds pays 20 dollars an hour
And that worker is paying is paying over 35% taxes after $7500.

Which as a little basic math will show, leaves the Dane with less than the American getting $7.25.

?!!?!?!

(20x40x50)=40,000-7500=32500x.65=21125+7500=28625

(7.25x40x52)=15,080

Plus the Dane will have far more access to a wider range of social services

I never claimed that, but upon doing some searching given what the cost of living is in Denmark and the US, you are probably not any better off in Denmark even making that much more money per hour.

Denmark prices

United States prices

Those are averages.

Just curious, which worker do you think makes more?

Denmark, $20/hour, with a local purchasing power of $109.
New York, $7.78/hour, with a local purchasing power of $100.

Those are based on your site that you linked. The purchasing power means that $100 buys $100 worth of stuff. Purchasing power of $150, means that $100 buys $150 worth of stuff.

Would you make "more" money living in Denmark making $20? Or New York making $7.87?

Well obviously that would be Denmark, except that the minimum wage in New York is $8.00 and set to go up on Jan 1, 2015 to $8.75 and $9.00 on Jan 1, 2016.

And of course there is this page.

Denmark vs. USA...

Yes, but the difference in consumer prices is 6%.

The difference in pay is over 80%.

Convince me poor people would be worse off with 74% more income.


Alex Smith 908 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Can you prove:
Quote:
Whenever someone's symptoms completely disappear with non-drug therapy that means those symptoms were caused by completely external forces. ... they aren't something that would be treated with drugs to begin with.

I don't have my texts with me so quick of webmd

Quote:

Interpersonal Therapy for Depression

Interpersonal therapy focuses on the behaviors and interactions a depressed patient has with family, friends, co-workers, and other important people encountered on a day-to-day basis. The primary goal of this therapy is to improve communication skills and increase self-esteem during a short period of time. It usually lasts three to four months and works well for depression caused by loss and grief, relationship conflicts, major life events, social isolation, or role transitions (such as becoming a mother or a caregiver).

All of the listed reasons for psychotherapy treated depression are external forces. Dopamine imbalance isn't going to be cured by talking.

You're claiming that certain feelings, depending on HOW they were caused, have nothing to do with chemicals in the brain?

Do you have any proof of this?

As far as I'm aware, this is a fundamental process of why we feel things. For example, petting a dog is external, but it causes your brain to release oxytocin in your brain which increases feelings of trust and love. The same process happens to both mother and infant while breastfeeding.

The brain is a collection of chemical producers and receptors. This fact is one of the fundamental processes by which it accomplishes things.

If you're going to claim otherwise, I'm going to ask you for evidence.


Vod Canockers wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Denmark mcdonalds pays 20 dollars an hour
And that worker is paying is paying over 35% taxes after $7500.

Which as a little basic math will show, leaves the Dane with less than the American getting $7.25.

?!!?!?!

(20x40x50)=40,000-7500=32500x.65=21125+7500=28625

(7.25x40x52)=15,080

Plus the Dane will have far more access to a wider range of social services

I never claimed that, but upon doing some searching given what the cost of living is in Denmark and the US, you are probably not any better off in Denmark even making that much more money per hour.

Denmark prices
United States prices

Those are averages.

Just curious, which worker do you think makes more?

Denmark, $20/hour, with a local purchasing power of $109.
New York, $7.78/hour, with a local purchasing power of $100.

Those are based on your site that you linked. The purchasing power means that $100 buys $100 worth of stuff. Purchasing power of $150, means that $100 buys $150 worth of stuff.

Would you make "more" money living in Denmark making $20? Or New York making $7.87?


Part of the thing on concentration is to specifically prevent stacking of spells for lots of buffing. Is that something you specifically want to allow?

As for permanent effects based on location, I think a more elegant solution would be two-fold:

NPCs: Just have whatever permanent effects you choose. You're the DM designing the adventure, consider these like the legendary lair actions of some monsters, but for wizards they manifest as permanent spells.

PCs: Case by case basis. If the party wizard wants to create an illusion in a place, decide what kind of components they need, how much they cost, or how hard they are to get. For one, this leaves the possibility open much earlier (instead of just at very high levels) and also leaves it more flexible to the DM.

Also, for a spell called Permanency, most of it is pretty temporary as written.

If you just want to let casters have multiple buff spells going, why not make it a feat? Split Concentration. Maybe the DC to maintain spells goes up the more you have.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Simon Legrande wrote:
Alex Smith 908 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Nah, I can do it in my head. It just struck me, that's all.
It's a rather sad thing that the mentally disabled are much more likely to be victimized than the general public, and that when they do lash out it is usually at someone trying to help them.

It's a rather sad standard human nature thing that the mentally disabled those who are different are much more likely to be victimized than the general public those who conform to the standard.

It's human nature, man. Thousands of years of human nature. It's going to take a looooooong time to undo things that have been reinforced by thousands of years of practice.

For kids, it isn't just being different (though that does paint a target), it's also the perception of weakness. Humans have a tendency to create a hierarchy, kids are no different. Even if you aren't on the top of the hierarchy, if you can put someone else below you, your standing improves. The more people you push down, the higher you go (relatively speaking).

It's a myth that bullies are loner kids harboring lots of angst. Most bullies are popular kids, who maintain their position through aggression, physical or social. Not many people WANT to think of themselves like that, but for kids with poor impulse control (cause they're kids) it's easy to fall into that trap of pushing others down.


I'm a fan of the early therapy method.

1) it feels less intrusive, no drugs.
2) really it's just about training the child's brain to perceive and react to common human interaction, which is a valuable skill in all periods of human history.

The problem is it has to be done before the age of 6. I don't think any official studies have been done to confirm it, but having pieced together information from other disciplines (particularly language development) there is a major change happening in the brain at 6 y/o give or take a year.

At 5 or younger, the brain functions in a fairly simple, but multifaceted manner. The simple portion is the focus of this idea, the multifaceted is really just multiple versions of the same simple thing happening (kids are really good at paying attention to multiple sensory inputs). That simple aspect is that kids can only access one idea at a time, the strongest evidence for this is language, but it's also been proven through problem solving experiments.

An example:

Grandma's house is far away and smells like cookies.

To an adult, this seems like a pretty simple sentence, but it contains several concepts.

1) Grandma's house
2) far away
3) smells like cookies

Very small children can't form sentences like that. They can say:
1) Grandma's house is far away.
2) Grandma's house smells like cookies.

They could technically create the full sentence, but there would be a long pause in the middle and probably be more like: Grandma's house is far away and... and... Grandma's house smells like cookies.

Usually by the age of 6 the more complex sentences start to form. What's happening is that the brain is linking ideas together in a string. Even rats can link 2 ideas, but they can't link 3. In similar experiments, rats and children perform equally well when you require them to link 3 ideas together. At 6 y/o though, humans suddenly surge ahead and become really good at those tests.

My hypothesis would be that if they don't develop certain social skills by age 6 (or whenever this development in the brain happens for them) they will always have a more difficult time linking complex ideas involving social interaction. There's a lot of things we can change about the brain... unless it's something that's linked to a development period. Then major aspects can be locked in for life.

Video about how humans start learning language in the womb. One of the interesting tidbits, newborns in different regions of the world cry slightly differently, with those differences being predicted by the mother's primary language.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:

A Song of Ice and Fire (books)

Yeah its cliche, and it really doesn't bother me that much, but the wait between books is brutal. Also, even though I liked a Feast for Crows, waiting 10ish years for any chapter about Daenerys, Jon, or Tyrion was so so aggravating

For me it was because a Feast for Crows was so bad (comparatively). It took me a while to figure out why it was bad... I didn't care about any of the characters. It's predominantly filled with characters who didn't have POV chapters before that book. The effect is that you've read 3 very long books about A, B, C story lines, then you get a book about characters who are involved with them, but in some cases only tangentially.

Spoiler:
Then we wait 10 years for book 5, which for one major character, puts them exactly where they were at some point during book 2, like we spent two whole books following them on this progression and he just says "f*@# it, lets start over". I still liked book 5, but man, that was frustrating.


Buri wrote:
It's too early to criticize because there's a lack of information which you can criticize. But, for all we know, the rules portion could be spearate from the character builder could be separate from the campaign management could be separate from a persistent subscription to errata could be separate from new book releases and so on. We just don't know. Wizards also can't promise exactly how the application will work because they're not building it. The building is being done by an outside firm.

Two things...

1) Yes, I can criticize. It is entirely within my right to do so. When criticizing it is important to do so with all available information, to ignore available information is to criticize in an inappropriate manner. As a consumer, I am entirely within my rights to criticize though. As a consumer within a country that allows free speech, I'm entirely entitled to share that criticism as well.

2) Wizards is the only party to blame for incomplete information. If they don't release information, I can only judge/criticize based on what they have released. To say that I should withhold judgement because at some future date they MIGHT release more information is hogwash.

I get that you disagree with my point of view and that's okay. My point of view is inherently subjective because it is talking about my requirements for a product. I want an easily transferable digital version that isn't reliant on proprietary software, nor requires an internet connection to view. I don't think that's a lot to ask, considering I own at least 50 other games that meet those requirements, all of which have been obtained legally (not all were purchased, because some where free).

It's not brave new territory. It's ground that has been tread hundreds of times. It's been tread by companies that are very successful, such as Paizo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tokyo Ska Paradise Orchestra - 黄昏を遊ぶ猫


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
...Hulk...lack of sequels and the fact that not a single character from that movie has popped up elsewhere.
Could've sworn one character made into The Avengers....big green guy, poor vocabulary, anger management issues....what was his name...?

Kermit?


If it's something other than just PDF's, it's not going to work for me. I have an old iPad (gen 1). I can't upgrade the OS, which means I can't download 99% of new apps. Basically it's a pdf viewer at this point.


Lord Foul II wrote:
Every GM ever who let me play gestalt :D

I had a GM let me play gestalt AND ride a gold dragon. It was pretty awesome.


And it shows. That's all I'm saying there.


Gruumash . wrote:

KONA Beer : Golden Wave reminds me of the beer LightShip which I liked a lot, was the Sam Adams light beer originally not available any more.

It is a lighter beer so I enjoy it more in the summer warm times.

For me, I really enjoy the citrus-like taste of hops, but I'm not a fan of bitter beer. Golden Wave was very hoppy in flavor without being bitter, so I really enjoyed it. I agree, a great summer beer.


Excluding me as a customer is a compromise?

I'm not sore about it. It just seems silly to try to even rationalize at this stage.

1 to 50 of 4,790 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.