The 8th Dwarf's page

Interesting question, One of my family members is on the board of ICASO. Asside from Australia his primary focus is AIDS prevention in SE Asia, primarily in Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand and Cambodia.

Indonesia is primarily Muslim I will ask him.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Man my life is boring..... I should have been a communist, rather than a middle class Chardonnay socialist.

My great grandmother was a half French Mauritian (creole) half Scottish, Australian born communist that rode motorcycles and married a black man (Australian Aboriginal) in the 1930's. She then became a fire breathing baptist and things went downhill from there...

Thank you and as an atheist I also have respect and admiration for the Paizo community as well.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am an atheist and i think what the pope says is very important, it effects the lives of millions who are of his faith directly and millions who don't indirectly.

If the Pope just said yes to condoms for catholics, Millions of lives would be saved, through disease prevention and the limiting of over population.

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Gunter the Penguin wrote:

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

JMD- Adventure time, the Ice King.

*smashes bottles*

Now Gunter be nice...

Wernk. *smash*

Gunter go eat the Ice Kings socks.

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

JMD- Adventure time, the Ice King.

*smashes bottles*

Now Gunter be nice...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Marthkus wrote:

Ummm No. He didn't say that. He said atheist can be good not that they are saved. Salvation comes from grace not works. Being good has nothing to do with being saved. Doing good my be a fruit of being saved and atheist may go to heaven, but an atheist who does good or is good does not necessarily go to heaven.

sermon wrote:

"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! "Father, the atheists?" Even the atheists. Everyone!"

I'm not sure how else to take that. But then you seem to agree, when you say that "atheist may go to heaven".

It definitely seems a change to Church theology that has long required faith and often the intermediary of the Church itself.

And the schism over doctrine starts now!!!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Its a good idea.... I am not up in arms

- Some people were saying we shouldn't celebrate anything in schools just "learn" about it.

We can homogenize the world to sterile boring no anybody offending gruel...

Or we can share and participate and have a good time.

I am on this planet to have a good time with the people I inhabit it with. The more holidays, parties and festivals I can attend the better.

Even if its as simple as making a card for somebody, I am there.

I am not here to crawl in into a safe room for fear of offending everybody.

As a GM I wouldn't go easy on them, if they are not up to the job or can't adapt then that's thier problem. Real life doesn't take it easy on you if you are inept, I'll adapted, not flexible or under prepared.

As a player I would be hiring retainers or henchmen. Especially if I was the squishy spell caster. It would be good to have a couple of sword swinging brutes on my payroll if there was ever an argument over the division of treasure.

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Lord Fyre wrote:

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Ummm thanks.... Is it retrospective?

Will they apologise for all the good people they killed because they didn't believe in the catholic faith?

Hopefully, this is a preparation for that. :)

That would be nice, it won't bring them back or restore the native cultures they destroyed but it is positive.

Does the current generation bear the guilt of all those crimes, or just what they have actually done/are doing?

The people don't but the institution does, if you are part of an institution that has done the wrong thing, then it is important that you as a member work to get that institution to make amends, and redress its wrongs.

I'm not saying don't teach *about* holidays, I'm saying don't *celebrate* them. There's a difference between learning about something and participating in it.

Participation is different. In the case of in-school Mother's Day celebrations or projects, why should a child who's lost her mother have to sit in a classroom where everyone is making things for their mother as a school activity? (I would hope, for goodness' sake, that she wouldn't be forced to participate if she objected, but then again one of the reasons school programs fall under fairly strict scrutiny is because we don't expect children to have the same level of understanding of and confidence in their freedom to object or refuse to participate.)

No a child who has lost thier parent/s would not be forced to participate and appropriate steps are taken by the teaching staff and the child would be treated with sensitivity and empathy.

You can not cottonwool people either because they do not learn to cope with loss. Should we stop mums and dads picking up thier children from school because it may make children without parents sad.

My daughters are taught, that families are all different, some kids have 2 mums, some have Aunts and uncles, some are grandparents, some are extended families, some are 2 dads, some are just one mum or one dad and so on.

They are taught my uncles (my uncle and his partner) are are men who fall in love with men and mums best friend is a lady that loves ladies and that's the way the world turns and we should love them and respect them for who they are.

I am very proud of the school my kids go to, the teachers are excellent, and the P&C group work very hard to make it a welcoming place where difference is celebrated and where people are encouraged to participate as much as possible.

Not some sterile joyless place where you do nothing but" learn".

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Ummm thanks.... Is it retrospective?

You mean retroactive?

I'm an Austalian English is my second language ;-b

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Ummm thanks.... Is it retrospective?

Will they apologise for all the good people they killed because they didn't believe in the catholic faith?

Hopefully, this is a preparation for that. :)

That would be nice, it won't bring them back or restore the native cultures they destroyed but it is positive.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ummm thanks.... Is it retrospective?

Will they apologise for all the good people they killed because they didn't believe in the catholic faith?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hama wrote:

This for god's sake

While i understand the notion i have several gripes about this.
1. Those holidays happen on weekends AFAIK. How can a school forbid students to do things outside of it?
2. Banning a specific holiday because it might offend someone is ridiculous. If we do that we must ban all religious holidays then. I'm sure that someone finds Easter or Ramadan offensive.
3. Because a kid has two moms or doesn't have a dad, other kids with dads shouldn't celebrate father's day? Really? That is stupidity of highest order. I have broken all relations with my father (long story, irrelevant to the discussion), and thus i should get miffed at my neighbor who celebrates father's day by taking his awesome dad out for a night of fun?
4. You just cannot appease everyone, because you are trying to appease humanity, and that is impossible.

I see nothing wrong with a school not celebrating holidays. Frankly, if I had children, I'd rather have them spend their time in school learning and leave celebrating holidays to their time with their families.

The school isn't banning people from celebrating at home, as far as I can tell. It's saying the holidays aren't going to be celebrated at the school.

I prefer what they do at my children's school, they celebrate everything, Easter, Diwali, Ramadan, Passover, Chinese New Year(and so on). They teach tolerance and respect for all cultures and most of these celebrations are lots of fun.

My children's school is a typical Australian government run primary school. Not teach children about the other cultures that you live with and not participating in and sharing your culture is a good way to breed racism, mistrust and ignorance.

I am an atheist (its up to my children to make thier own decision on what they believe) but I also acknowledge others believe differently to me and I am happy to participate if invited especially if its going to be fun, like Diwali or Chinese New Year, or be respectful if it is Easter or Passover.

Besides all these days are great fund raisers for the school, it lets them buy extra epi pens, interactive white boards, vegetable gardens and so on.

JMD- Adventure time, the Ice King.

Hum.

It's sunny there, and the duck-billed platypuses(?) can roam free, election or no election.

Yes it is platypuses...

Its winter now, and cold and wet...

Well played Goblin! Are you sure you aren't an anarchist rather than a communist? You managed to troll those without a sense of the ironic :-)

I seem to recall the mace was "re-invented" for use in close combat in the trenches.

And also: If that runner is an Aussie at Gallipoli, he might be played by a young Mel Gibson.

Yep, see if you can find pictures of trench raiding equipment, nasty stuff.

I tear up at the end of that movie all the time, All Quiet on the Western Front does the same.

Feel late to the party, but that is a wonderful front cover.

I am already imagining the hilarious 'updates' the Russians are yelling into thier radios, notifying thier superiours about "crazy people with swords." XD

Not many portable radios at this time. A field telephone if you are lucky, a runner is the most likely form of communication, especially in the case of the Russians who were under equipped.

Cossacks were crazy people with swords, at very common in Russia. Most Cavalry units were issued with swords at this time, primarily because they were all still mounted on horses. There were still some units using lances... Not effectively against a British mad minute (30 rounds from a bolt action rifle on a 12 inch target at 300 yards in 1 min) or a machine gun, but the belief was once you could make a breach in the trench line, the cavalry could pour through and roll up the infantry.
It wasn't until Generals like Sir John Monash proved combined arms worked that the breaches were made and they were exploited by armored cars rather than horsemen. Read up on the battle of Le Hammel and the 100 Days Ofensive.

The one place mounted soldiers were efective in WW1 was the Sinai, Palestine, Syria campaign.

As for swords Bayonets got to ridiculous lengths at this time, due to the reach theory.

But changing your tactics to specifically counter it is identical in effect to nerfing it, is what I'm saying.

It's two routes to the same goal, except one is the direct route and the second pussyfoots around it but ends up at the same goal ultimately.

No it isn't - I don't know about American football, but I will talk about it anyway.

Let's say Washington runs the same formation against you game in game out. You have your defensive moves worked out and your counters are perfect. So it's all down to the skill of the players, the bounce of the ball and the direction of the wind.

All of a sudden the Red Skins go from a throwing game to a running game. You keep running the same defensive plays as before, and you wonder why you are loosing.

Washington are still playing within the rules of the game - nothing they are doing is broken. It's you as defensive coach that has failed because you failed to adapt your plays.

It no point crying to the ref and asking for them to change the rules and stop the running game because you can't cope and taking out you crayon mid game and scribbling out the rules you don't like is dickishness as well.

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

You have an excuse if you are new and inexperienced. But if you are a long time GM and you can't cope with the random stuff that players pull the you need to take a good look at yourself.

When there are new players on the field with different tactics, you can't keep going back to your old play book and having a big cry when your well trodden old plays are stomped on by switched on players.

You adapt, there is no broken only different and different requires you to think and some people don't like troubling the little grey cells so they moan.

If you can't come up with your own answers ask others there is no shame in that. This not a gentleman's game of cricket with all the politeness and FairPlay. It's meant to be challenging and exciting and DMs are supposed to play dirty within the rules to make it fun for all.

I'm not entirely sure if you read my post and are trying (and failing) to reply to it, or are just ranting because you can.

You seem to be of the opinion that anybody who would like something to be officially fixed by Paizo is some sort of crybaby who should "man up" and pretend nothing's broken by fixing it themselves.

But as a I said before, IF IT REQUIRES FIXING, IT'S KINDA OBVIOUS IT'S BROKEN, YEAH?

I am ranting because I can :-)

And I like it when I get people to shout at me on the Internet.

None of the classes need fixing if you can't adapt don't punish your players.

I got to 13th level with a witch, my main tricks, were slumber, misfortune, and fortune. It threw the GM a few times allowing us to take out two of his BBEGs in a few rounds.

The GM had never GM'ed Pathfinder before and was a bit flummoxed, he didn't moan about my character being broken, he got pro-active.

He did some research, the evil organisation we were fighting had already thrown hit squads of assassins against us, suddenly there were elves, half elves and monks in the hit squads.

Our enemy started using intellegent undead, it became more difficult.

The enemy had assessed our tactics, one would delay until after I acted and kick awake anybody I slumbered.

I had to change my tactics... Feeblemind is my best friend.

Life in general.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You have an excuse if you are new and inexperienced. But if you are a long time GM and you can't cope with the random stuff that players pull the you need to take a good look at yourself.

When there are new players on the field with different tactics, you can't keep going back to your old play book and having a big cry when your well trodden old plays are stomped on by switched on players.

You adapt, there is no broken only different and different requires you to think and some people don't like troubling the little grey cells so they moan.

If you can't come up with your own answers ask others there is no shame in that. This not a gentleman's game of cricket with all the politeness and FairPlay. It's meant to be challenging and exciting and DMs are supposed to play dirty within the rules to make it fun for all.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Any DM who says X class is broken is lazy.

If X class is breezing through your game you need to take time to look at the class and figure out how to moderate them through game play not through nerfing.

Just because your old tricks of handling the existing characters are stale and don't work for a new class is not an indication of broken it is a challenge to be taken up.

Get off your arse and be creative. NPCs and monsters arent stupid.

I am happy,

As the game has got more popular, the community population has grown and that small town feeling where felt that you knew all of the other commentators on the board has subsided. So it is not as friendly as it once was just because there are too many people to establish a good relationship with.

With a lot more people come a lot more complaints, the percentage doesn't change just the volume. So the storms of whiny crap and "dis is teh suxxors" can be overwhelming.

But there are gems of threads that need to be highlighted, where people are surprisingly mature, insightful and helpful.

Also some staff are good at moderating and commenting (Shout out to Lilith, Chris, Judy, James, Cosmo, Vic and Jason) and others not so good (they trigger confusion or alienation and should probably wait 20 mins and reread before they post their replies).

The best bumper-sticker I have seen so far is... "Voting for Tony because you hate Julia is like eating s+%% because you hate spinach!"

For Comrade Dwarf, Germaine Greer on Julia Gillard

Yeh that was good - occasionally GG gets back to her old school self

aw man yeahh my australian friends are all pretty disgusted

wasn't there some sort of scandal with the prime minister last fall or something

No real scandal... Australia has done very well out of the GFC and the government has done a lot of what it has set out to do.

The problems people have with Julia are the ingrained misogynistic tendencies in the conservative parties, and the press, they hammer her about a lot of inane crap.

She did make some promises she went back on and looked a right burke and that is where she lost my support.

What happened to Australia First (I think - the very anti-immigrant party with the female leader) ?

Also, do evangelical Christian groups have any influence over any of the main parties?

One Nation was a joke - it only survived because the Conservatives in power at the time gave them oxygen enough to act as a distraction. That oxygen disappeared when they won a seat.

They were Primarily anti Asian, anti Middle Eastern, and anti African immigration. A lot of support came from 1st and 2nd generation European immigrants, who brought their racism with them.

The One Nation party "peaked at the 1998 election on 9 percent of the nationwide vote, electing one Senator in Queensland. The party has never approached these heights again, and while it nominally still exists it attracts a negligible percentage of the vote." (wiki)

The leader of the party was called Pauline Hanson - she was parodied mercilessly. A Drag Queen called Pauline Pantsdown had 2 top 10 hits with "I am a back door man" and "I dont like it". Backdoor man had a federal injunction raised against it as it was in the middle of an election and seen as prejudicial.

As for religion..... Most Australians are ambivalent, they will say I kind of believe in god but that's about as far as they go. We dont have much time for "God botherers" and we have less time for "god botherers" that bother us about god. The main churches have some power, but that is because it was established in the past.

Hillsong (evangelical) got popular for about 5 mins and has faded, there were some scandals - proving that any and every church run by human-beings is corrupt.

Bronze Age Aegean, Anatolia, Mesopotamia and Egypt.

Mycenaeans, Minoans, Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, and so on.

or

World War 1.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As host I supply the coffee, and occasionally Mrs 8th Dwarf will try a new recipe out on the guys. Some times I see something cool or different at the various international supermarkets and buy that for the guys to try.

The guys bring snacks even the GM will bring a block of chocolate.

Preach on, Comrade Dwarf!

I wish we had a choice, our so called "Labor" party has sold out.

The conservatives call themselves the "Liberal" party and is lead by a former trainee Jesuit priest, we call the mad monk, he likes to pose in speedo's.

The only effective and respectable politician has retired from leadership of the Greens and now the party is run by people the right and left can use as examples of crazy greenies.

The Australian Democrats imploded years ago after they knifed thier best chance in the back.

The National party (farmers party) are lap dogs of the Liberal party pretending to be cattle dogs.

Am I allowed to vent about Australian politics here? We have an election coming up soon.

I got to say: I agree with Sheldon (and Tim) here: Babylon 5 is a big pile of [REDACTED]. DS9 might have ripped of the basic idea, but the execution was better.

That doesn't make me like BBT, however.

I disagree with Sheldon and Tim (Tim only said that to get sacked) on Bab 5 but I do agree with Tim on the Phantom Menace.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

...and so it begins.

Fixed it for you

...and so it begins.

and Yes if have never watched Bab5 you do not understand, but you will .

You Have a Question? Is BBT good? NO!.

Why!

This!

You Have Forgotten Something. Big bang theory sans laugh modification/tuning .

Did Derp Farce 9 rip off Bab 5?

YES!

Why didn't JMS sue Parramount?

NEVER ASK THAT QUESTION

jEEZUS that was bad. Man. I think we have a new winner. JEEZUS.

That is significantly, measurably, fantastically more messed up than the first one.

I may be in the mood for some BBT after that...

JEEZUS... Holy crap. Like 90 solid minutes of the YNC. Wow.

Wow you had to watch the Human Centipede one and 2 to want to watch BBT..... And you willingly self inflicted mental trauma in the name of pop science.... My hat is off to you, you are a scholar and a jellybean dude!

This thread is glorious.... I am supporting, team Sebastian and team Kirth. I would say "rooting for" but that's kind of a very rude phrase in Australia.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As I suspected there is a cultural difference...as to why I found your definition slightly insulting. The people I listed are nerds, proud nerds.

As I said above I have been called a history nerd... I can talk to you about various subjects until your ears bleed.

For us a nerd is a person who studies too much and has too much knowledge of a subject for their own good.

A geek is the type of person who doesn't have knowledge about anything useful, although their knowledge of their favourite obsession is encyclopaedic.

This is from the Macquarie Australian Dictionary (revised on a yearly basis)
nerd
/nɜd/ (say nerd)
noun Colloquial 1.  a person who is unpopular by reason of not participating in the social life of a school, college, etc., because of an obsession with study, computers, etc.

geek
/gik/ (say geek)
noun Colloquial

1.  a social misfit, especially one who is overly preoccupied with some interest or pursuit that is seen as unfashionable.
2.  Also, computer geek. a person who is totally preoccupied with activities involving computers and other digital devices, especially in playing computer games.
3. Chiefly US a person who makes a spectacle of himself or herself for the entertainment of others.
4.  any eccentric person.

Steve Geddes wrote:

Jessica Price wrote:

Geeky != nerdy.

Really? What's the difference?

A geek is either someone who's deeply passionate about a particular subject (a film geek, a baseball geek, a language geek), or someone who self-identifies as a geek and participates in subcultures/fandoms that fall under the umbrella of geek culture (tech, scifi/fantasy, gaming, comic books, etc.).

A nerd is someone with poor social skills, no sense of fashion, and obsessive devotion to non-mainstream interests.

There's certainly a lot of overlap between the two demographics, but not all geeks are nerds. There are plenty of geeky men and women who are not socially inept.

The more I think about it the more your definition appears to be very wrong. There are a monumental number of nerdy men any women who are very socially adept. Carl Sagan, Professor Brian Cox, Dr Pamella Gay, Dr Karl Kruszelnicki, Neil Degrass Tyson, Dr Julius Sumner Miller, Professor Mary Beard I could keep going.

The disservice and danger your definition presents is magnified when it comes to women. For example, Professor Beard presented one of the most fascinating documentaries on the people of ancient Rome I have ever seen, she is a brilliant communicator but because of her appearance, her age, the way she walked and talked there was a controversy (aside from political controversies of her own making that (some opinions she has expressed that I disagree with).

It's hard enough to get shows that have women presenting Science and history they also generally are only allowed to be good looking presenters as well (Bettany Hughes, Dr Alice Roberts, Kari Byron). I suggest you start de- stigmatising the word nerd and using it interchangeably with you definition of geek (which I like).

Geek and nerd are interchangeable where I come from... Both are insults, unless used by other geeks or nerds.

I have been called a history nerd and a computer geek.

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Interesting thing about Friends is that it was inspired by the movie Singles....

Singles is one of my favourite movies....

I have never been able to watch a full episode of Friends.

I Did not know that, I will have to track it down for a look see.

( I like Friends too)

Doodlebug I pretty much agree with your Mum ( although Leonard's my favorite - Sheldon is too selfish imo, even if he probably can't help it). I would say would say it pokes fun at geeks and everyone else in the show ( geek or not).

Warner Bros. Television tried immediately to turn Singles into a television series. When Crowe balked at the notion, the company proceeded with the idea, engaged a new writing and directing team, changing elements and the name to Friends, which ran successfully on NBC from 1994-2004.

Singles is very 1990's...

Interesting thing about Friends is that it was inspired by the movie Singles....

Singles is one of my favourite movies....

I have never been able to watch a full episode of Friends.

As long as you remember that "I dun like it" =/= A bad show.

Conversely as long as you and others remember that "dis show is da bomb" =/= A good show.

DarkLightHitomi wrote:

This is exactly what I want to avoid in at least one place in the world.

The US seems the closest at first, but I have the sinking feeling that I must search for some other freedom loving place to support, which don't exist as far as I know.

I dread the possibility that I may find myself in a situation where trying to acheive freedom will create a choice between two morally detestable options.

Of course freedom isn't free, but should we live with the blissfully ignorent children while we feel nothing but the chains of others fear, or should we resist, resulting in either the same old empire with a new name or way too many nightmares?

There are quite a few other countries which rank higher on various freedom indices than the United States, and have for quite some time. I doubt you'd be interested in living in them, though. They tend to be the sorts of places that get characterized as "socialist paradises" by conservatives.

Ha had a look at a few of the indices.... My country mostly top 3 to 5 a few top 10s and one of the best places in the world to be born in (as long as we are better than the English and Kiwi's it's all that matters).

Currently we have a socialist government but (sadly) the conservatives will win the next election.

I didn't read the fire arms freedom indice I don't mind being last on that one.

Phinneas and Ferb have a D&Dish episode.

Don't get me wrong the majority of troops are British (Scottish, Welsh, English and Irish) and they are highly professional and excellent soldiers. The same with the French they are amoungst the best in the world.

The Brittish had a problem at staff level with inbred aristocrats stuffing things up, until the more professional types roll in later in the conflict. This was the case with both WW1 and WW2.

The French had political and high command problems that caused their armies not to be as effective as they could have been in WW1 and crippled thier armies in WW2.

The French and Engilsh who had been fighting each other since 1066 were not natural allies, they mistrusted each other and failed to collaborate effectively... The failings of 1914-18 lead directly to the same levels of suspicion and failure to communicate and was a major contribution to the disastrous Battle of France in WW2.

I have had no regrets buying hero lab, if you are short on cash you can pick up the extra bits as you need.

It is a very good product and if you have an iPad 2 or better there is a free app to display character sheets.

The only negative is the official character sheet on HL is un polished and could be set out like the app.

I have to disagree - Fire Fly was an excellent show that failed because Fox did not know how to market it and the people in charge did not like it and did not understand it.

It was shown out of order and at the wrong time on its first run.

So people had no idea of what was going on.

It had mass appeal - the Movie made bucket loads and was a success.

The Browncoats are a real thing.

Just because it is successful does not make it good... By your hypothesis Jersey Shore is a good show....