StrangeSox

Josh's mortal enemy: the 91 MPH fastball.

Hey alexei! Turned on the game just in time for that one.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 5, 2009 -> 01:44 PM) I dont know whether or not Zelda II was like that. Link needed to save Princess Zelda who was asleep or something. It was one of the hardest games that I played on NES. Super Mario Brothers 2 was a dream sequence which is why there is no Bowser. Although you could play as 4 different characters which was cool. That game was a bastard. I wasn't able to beat it until I played it again on an emulator a year or two ago.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 08:21 PM) That wasn't my point at all. With that said, of course what you're saying here is valid. I love your new avatar

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 12:11 PM) Seriously? How is the phrase "my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims" not supposed to insinuate that his father was Muslim? And if it wasn't what was the point of that statement? To say that his relatives on his father's side have been Muslim in the past but may or may not still be but they definitely were in the past? GMAB. That totally was meant to point to his father's religious background. I don't give two s***s what religion he or his family is, but I can't see how one can argue that was not what was meant. You make fun of Kap for saying stuff but it seems as if someone is always grasping at something to try and contradict him, no matter what it was he said. I come from German and Irish families that include generations of Christians (Catholics and Lutherans, to be specific). I do not share that same religion, but I am aware of it and Christian culture because I have been exposed to it.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 10:49 AM) It's stupid and short-sighted because it counts all runs equally and all runs allowed equally. In real baseball, losing or winning a game by 10 runs vs. winning or losing a game by 3 runs does not matter, but in that particular formula it does. It rewards teams with average pitching and inconsistent but powerful offenses (like the Indians seemingly every year) and takes away from teams with good pitching that play a lot of close games because they lack a powerful offense (seems like the Angels every year). Tampa Bay has the 2nd best run differential in baseball right now but has the 16th best record and is 4th in their division instead of leading it, which apparently they should. Is that a good sign of a bad manager? Probably not. You judge a manager by how a team is performing with regards to organizational expectations, as well as how he handles the game situationally and how players develop under him. If your manager is getting "extra wins" when run differential shows he shouldn't be, maybe instead of praising the guy you should ask why he keeps sending such-and-such pitcher out there or such-and-such defender out there when all the player does is contribute to your run differential negatively? Or maybe you should ask why the offense is so inconsistent or outright poor? Or perhaps your run differential is too small on the positive side and that is a reflection of a poor manager who runs himself out of innings too often? In some cases the formula can come out pretty close which should be no surprise to anyone considering the parity in the league and how close (+ or -) most players are to league average. But it's still not worth anything. That's my feeling as well. Its too simple of a measure. It needs to take into account the deviations of runs scored/ allowed to be more accurate. Assigning any difference from your metric and reality to the manager is just ad hoc. I have to admit that I haven't seen any information on how well it correlates to actual win totals year-to-year. It may be an accurate predictor.

Thanks for the replies. It would be nice if they had some way of communicating that information at the park.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jun 3, 2009 -> 08:48 PM) Why? It doesn't seem to actually predict anything. Whenever its off, you just throw in the "manager" fudge factor.

Was there any reason given for pulling Anderson from the game yesterday?

Where is this 3000 number coming from?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jun 3, 2009 -> 10:43 PM) Ok dude, now you're talking out your ass. Let 'er rip. I recall seeing Bush clearing brush on many occasions. Really though, its hard to argue that the media hasn't been fawning over Obama. He's a popular, charismatic guy. If you see his poll numbers drop sufficiently, I think you'll see these fluffer stories go away.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 3, 2009 -> 03:04 PM) Dumb that down for me please lol @ the irony of me asking you to dumb this down, immediately following the last post I made Basically, publicly-held companies have a duty to protect the best interests of their shareholders/ bondholders (unless you're GM! ). So, they're required to *try* to earn a good return-on-investment. I'm not a banker or financial guy, so I could have this completely backwards. ss2k5, nss, ck or some others might be able to explain it better/ correctly. edit: added "try", obviously its not illegal to suck at business and lose money.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 3, 2009 -> 03:00 PM) Technically true, but as a corporate entity (or series of entities) its primary motivation/bottom line is to make money. Which explains so many things. If Obama was a Republican, and was as popular as he is now, he would be getting nonsense headlines like "Obama likes cheeseburgers" or "Obama's wife wears a short skirt." Doesn't their fiduciary duty legally obligate them to pursue higher profits?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 3, 2009 -> 02:48 PM) The media is not there just to make money. The media is given an extraordinary role in society; it is specifically protected by the first amendment of the constitution of the united states not so that it can make money, but to allow for an informed populace. The electronic media; television and radio, are able to use the public airwaves at below what that space should reasonably cost because they are expected to perform a public service; to allow for an informed populace. Saying that the media's purpose is to generate profit is to ignore the fact that the government has granted it special permission on repeated occasion on the grounds that it performs a vital public service. What they ought to do isn't necessarily what they actually do. If you don't turn a profit, you'll be out of business. Ergo, media companies are looking to turn profits. I would hope that, as a society, we would value accurate, relevant information and discussion/ debate highly so that the most honest and objective media outlets perform the best, but I think we can clearly see that this isn't the case.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 3, 2009 -> 01:34 PM) my responses: I don't expect there to be a tutorial for the whole game - obviously the big draw to these types of games is the epic scale of it all. But other games (WoW for instance) does a really good job of forcing you to do things in the beginning which will teach you the basic skills needed to play the game. I felt like Fallout gave you absolutely no direction at all. You're thrown into a world, you're asked to pick between different skills sets you know nothing about, and to do things you simply don't know how to do. It was incredibly frustrating. I thought there was a whole tutorial in the Vault when you start the game for basic controls? I was used to playing Oblivion, so I can't say that I remember any difficulty getting around at first. Anything in DC proper is blocked off. You have to take the subways in and out and to get to different sections. It took me a while to realize that, too, and yes, it was annoying. The rest of the map (basically anything west of the Potomac) is free to explore. Once its crippled its less effective. They can't run with crippled legs, can't aim well with crippled arms, etc. I remember being over-matched at first as well (though I ignored the main quest entirely until I had done everything else). By the end , you'll be able to mow down pretty much anything you come across. There's at least one other quest that you can get in Megatown that you can complete right away (not in town, but with your current skill set). One thing to keep in mind, if you're going to keep playing, is that visiting certain spots jumps the main storyline ahead. That happened to me a few times. You can find out what to avoid in various FAQ's.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jun 2, 2009 -> 11:07 AM) yeah I never understand when people say they hate Ferrell. Sometimes he just says one word and I wanna pee my pants with laughing so hard. But there seem to be alot of people that hate him and think he is the complete opposite of funny. I like Ferrell but he takes a lot of dumb roles. I have zero interest in his newest one.

Stone and Hawk were talking about Josh's swing last night.

We need to open up opportunities for threats, intimidation and violence to all sides.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jun 1, 2009 -> 10:54 AM) Well which one is cheaper? I think there is a black label too. Red is the cheapest. Blue is a few hundred dollars.

The CBO released a study a few years ago about the costs of malpractice lawsuits and insurance. It's a tiny amount, something like 4 or 5%.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 27, 2009 -> 10:43 PM) 2. L.O.S.E.R P.A.Y.S. That would solve 50% of the problem right there. With that said, as has been asked over and over and over and over again on this site, tell me when the hell the government has EVER gotten anything like this right in the lowest cost estimates they give when they say they are going to take over anything? With tort reform, there's a whole lot that can be done. The $250K cap here is bulls***, but that's not the point. It'll also make it highly unlikely that anyone would sue a large company even if they have legitimate claims. They can't afford the possibility of paying Merck's $200,000 legal fees for their team of lawyers vs. their $5000 lawyer.

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 28, 2009 -> 07:22 AM) We know people will die without food and water. We also know that not all medical treatments are 100% successful or without side effects. But there are people with spiritual beliefs who think you can live without food and water. We know they are wrong and that their child will die just as we know that these parents are wrong and that their child will die without treatment. No one is saying its 100% successful--that's not the point. The point is that not getting the treatment is 0% successful.

Kane ties it up

Clearly, quoting Norman Thomas means she's a full-blown Socialist and supports his aims and objectives and not just the general idea of the quote.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 27, 2009 -> 03:26 PM) Go read the 14th amendment. Seriously. And I'll tell you why later if I get the chance. I have to go. the 14th cannot explain away the logical paradox of "objective interpretation." By definition, an interpretation is subjective.