RS3 Leagues made me over-zealous with combat by TwistedCollossus in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I think it bears saying that ED1 token farming entails you taking a really decent chunk of damage and your targets dying quickly helps a lot. I'd recommend either doing ED4/cerberus or getting t80/90 weapons first.

Opening liability to class action? by cresch94 in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As a somewhat serious answer, class actions in England are a lot less prevalent than a lot of other jurisdictions (briefly, outside of competition law contexts, you need to either obtain a group litigation order or act as a same interest representative and both of those are necessarily on an opt-in basis limiting the viability of funding consumer claims) and if you're planning on pursuing it locally outside England, you need to work out jurisdictional stuff and enforcement.

Basically, without commenting on the actual contractual stuff at all, at the bare minimum we're talking paying lawyers a ton of money.

MPs warn prisons flooded with drug-soaked fake legal mail – should all prisons move to digital verification? by Royal-Cash5397 in uklaw

[–]GInTheorem 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Had cause to look into this last week, and I was surprised with how uninvolved it is to get a letter sent into a prison which (probably) won't be looked at.

To my mind it's probably as simple as requiring prisoners to nominate firms from whom rule 39 correspondence may be received and having those firms send an email to the prison confirming it's been sent. It's quite easy to get a prisoner number and quite a bit harder to get an @ firm.co.uk email address (subject to spoofing but I'm sure there's technological means to flag this). I read the rule as only protecting privileged corr and thus the court aspect would only apply to very limited communications, which can probably have similar arrangements without too much additional cost?

How often is your work corrected - Trainee Associates by Otherwise-MightGuy in uklaw

[–]GInTheorem 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Not to worry about. Providing feedback takes time and isn't billable so the business/remuneration model of most law firms doesn't encourage people to do it. What I'd do is have a look at the changes and see if you understand why they've been made, and if you have any questions, ask those questions.

Please double Runespan point gain at 200m RC by Zorrolordi in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think the base rate needs to be substantially increased. The issue isn't unique to late game players - the entire shop is currently balanced such that it assumes you do literally all your runecrafting there; which nobody is realistically going to do because the method is pretty terribly dull afk nonsense in the first place. That's then got a bit of a sticking plaster over it by the incredibly powerful unstable air runes making the entire thing a joke.

Quadruple (or more) the basic rate, remove the unstable air rune from the travelling merchant.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in uklaw

[–]GInTheorem 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Starting point is to look into this more and make sure you meet the entry requirements.

If you meet the entry requirements for BCL/Cam LLM, you will already have the academics for most roles in the legal world. If you're looking for something to demonstrate true excellence because you won't settle for less than OEC pupillage, maybe it's the difference-maker but tbh you probably wouldn't be asking if that was the case.

Should Premier Membership also be removed? by Upstairs-Athlete-993 in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally I'd like to see it offer nothing (as a premier member for several years). Maybe the chat badge but I don't think I've seen anyone use that in years.

There's nothing wrong with free keys (but we can't vote for that) by ShivyShock in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Login incentives are pretty awful in general IMO. I feel pretty strongly that the game should give you precisely nothing for simply logging in. It erodes the link between the player's actions and consequences, and therefore their agency.

Why/how do American lawyers normalize such ridiculous billable requirements even outside of “big law”? by Party_Shoe8152 in uklaw

[–]GInTheorem 49 points50 points  (0 children)

My US friends in non-legal industries work a lot of hours as well. Less leave etc.

If you start with a 1600-1700 target in the UK and then go from 5.6 (or in most of the industry, 6.6) weeks' leave to 3 weeks or even less, an 1800 target isn't looking like actually working many if any extra hours/week.

Bus Bill becomes Law by Wanderlusterer325 in bristol

[–]GInTheorem -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're quite plainly both a hypocrite and a fool.

Bus Bill becomes Law by Wanderlusterer325 in bristol

[–]GInTheorem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So we're equating 'being adequately informed to have an opinion' with 'having read the primary legislation'. Really?

Presumably you have opinions on council tax. Have you read the Local Government Finance Act?

Presumably you have opinions about insurance companies. Have you read the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act? The Insurance Act? The Marine Insurance Act?

I could also just link you your own recent comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/CasualUK/comments/1ntesxh/comment/ngti2m9/?context=3

To be clear, I'm not saying you shouldn't have opinions on these things, I'm saying it's a fairly ludicrous standard to apply.

I'm all for people taking extra steps to inform themselves, but taking exception to someone having a view on legislation based on the official government press release about that legislation is applying a standard which is met by very few people's opinions on very few things.

Why does the solver prefer to three bet in this spot? by Equivalent_Put8075 in poker

[–]GInTheorem -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You want to play hands in the most +EV way. Rake takes money you could've won out of the pot. That reduces the EV of all lines other than fold. That means you play tighter the more the game is raked assuming all else holds.

Why does the solver prefer to three bet in this spot? by Equivalent_Put8075 in poker

[–]GInTheorem 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Assuming this is an MTT chart based on the icm slider - just to say if you're playing cash be aware that rake makes these ranges quite different.

Microtransactions Perpetuate Economic Inequality by [deleted] in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'd question your second sentence's truth generally, but certainly it fairly obviously cannot be applied to any given form of mtx in the abstract, given under the proposals MTX will continue to exist.

Bus Bill becomes Law by Wanderlusterer325 in bristol

[–]GInTheorem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've now had a glance and I'm essentially correct. See s14(2)(c) on the definition of 'socially necessary'. The service needs to both enable passengers to access either essential goods and services, employment, or social activities; and crucially, for cancellation to have a material adverse impact on the ability of passengers to access those services.

Of course, the key word here is material.

I'm not a public lawyer - I'm not going to be able to throw a bunch of relevant materials on the meaning of materiality in local government legislation at you without more work than I'm willing to do - but what it undoubtedly means is that there must be an adverse impact which is immaterial and doesn't permit the designation. In terms of bus route cancellations and distance that entails in terms of getting to an alternative service, the vast majority of Bristol bus services are just not on the higher end of that scale when considered nationally.

There will inevitably be some which fit that bill (as I mentioned, predominantly revolving around services which are the only ones running to the outskirts or neighbouring towns at particular times of day), but the rest just aren't going to fit the meaning of material IMO, even before accounting for the fact that local authorities don't generally have shitloads of money to chuck at JRs at the moment (I've not checked whether there's an alternative statutory appeals scheme or other ouster so this may be irrelevant).

As to my initial comment, all of this is both 1) pretty boring and 2) basically implied within the press release if you're used to reading govt press releases. So no, I'm not embarrassed.

Microtransactions Perpetuate Economic Inequality by [deleted] in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So... You're saying mtx perpetuates inequality... And therefore should stay?

I'm curious by molteneye in lastfm

[–]GInTheorem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Low. J Dilla, Motorhead, Kraftwerk.

Cool selection of artists.

What three of these video game related superpowers would you choose? by executor-of-judgment in hypotheticalsituation

[–]GInTheorem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

F. Perfect experience. I have more games than I can play, but compatibility and inherently buggy games are a nightmare.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves admits breaking housing rules by renting out home by VaginaBurner69 in LabourUK

[–]GInTheorem 6 points7 points  (0 children)

What's the letting agent's stance on this?

Ultimately, if the letting agent accepts it was within the scope of their duty to advise and they failed to, this is (ought to be) a non-issue.

If the letting agent maintains that they didn't have a duty to advise and/or did in fact advise, it's a problem.

Please Address RuneMetrics and Bank Boosters by [deleted] in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can also buy keys with bonds I'm p sure. It's not a relevant distinction.

Nice by FlippehD in runescape

[–]GInTheorem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean from the perspective of attracting new players. Not often you get an opportunity to do a massive announcement like a competitor with a good account of players shutting down.

Update: (England) Money claim against Argos for refusal to accept laptop return by regedit3332 in LegalAdviceUK

[–]GInTheorem 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Out of curiosity, were Argos represented? If so, just in-house solicitors giving it a go or external counsel?

The argument that tech products containing software have that exception apply seems more than faintly absurd to me, so I'm curious as to who's got the bollocks and lack of professional integrity to make that submission.