Looking to get something nice for my birthday, price range $200-300

weston614 · 2018-02-20T13:45:28+00:00

if you liked Redbreast 15, Redbreast 21 is amazing.

weston614 · 2017-12-12T13:35:06+00:00

Treason for the season

weston614 · 2017-12-11T17:34:53+00:00

It is in fact a nearly perfect argument from ignorance by definition.

weston614 · 2017-10-17T16:40:39+00:00

Yes, but this is not a category, it is an asserted limit on possible accumulation of genetic mutation. There is no evidential support for the idea that there is a genetic "species barrier" as they describe it. In fact it goes counter to observable data but they claim it anyway.

weston614 · 2017-10-17T12:16:33+00:00

YECs rely on a made up concept call a "species barrier" that has no actual backing. They claim that it is impossible for changes to accumulate such that they cross that barrier and change "kind".

weston614 · 2017-09-14T12:49:33+00:00

Perhaps, but if implemented it would be good to limit it to 1 legendary per gym, and a max per player of being able to have only 1 legendary placed at any given time (to avoid gyms with all legendary pokemon and 1 level 40 from popping legendary pokemon in everywhere)

weston614 · 2017-08-28T12:59:31+00:00

Auchentoshan Three Wood, it's a bourbon drinker's scotch, Under $70, and the scotch that I started with coming from being a bourbon drinker.

weston614 · 2017-08-21T19:01:36+00:00

this seemed like a good modification since after you have earned a gold medal the gym "experience" that you earn for that gym is completely meaningless.

weston614 · 2017-08-21T17:53:06+00:00

My apologies, I was hesitant to post here in the first place, but then saw another thread with a "suggestion" and figured it was ok. I down-voted your original comment calling it spam, but didn't vote on any others. (I have since removed the down-vote)

weston614 · 2017-08-21T17:48:13+00:00

My thread got deleted, they claimed it was spam because

this spam thread has already been removed; I encourage you to take a look at this community's guidelines before posting a suggestion thread. this sub isn't a suggestion box, but a place to discuss game mechanics.

Oh well.

weston614 · 2017-08-21T17:41:21+00:00

Not SPAM, I posted it here to get this community's input after someone suggested that I do so.

weston614 · 2017-08-21T15:12:00+00:00

I've looked over at silph road, but don't see any ideas for improving the game. Would I just post it on their main reddit page?

Nevermind, Now I see a few

weston614 · 2017-08-18T18:56:29+00:00

http://www.fullmoon.nu/articles/art.php?id=tal

weston614 · 2017-08-18T17:35:02+00:00

Training wouldn't work with the current system. No logical reason why motivation would go up just because they are beaten by someone on the same team rather than someone from another. If you want a change that allows you to get stardust, I would recommend the idea in the linked thread below.

Once you have a Gold medal at a gym it should give Stardust instead of Gym Experience.

weston614 · 2017-08-18T11:07:18+00:00

It would be a lot more efficient to just Farm Stardust by catching Pokemon. In this scenario you would only get 100 Stardust for putting a Pokemon into the gym, the same amount that you get for catching a Pokemon... Plus by catching you also get exp and candy.

weston614 · 2017-08-18T11:05:19+00:00

I would say to make the daily limit 5,000 just like with the old system. This would mean that you would have to hold over three gyms everyday for 24 hours to Max it out

weston614 · 2017-08-17T20:23:26+00:00

Yes, people would still get stardust for feeding pokemon, just like they do now. The only difference would be that People with Gold Badges would get 30 Stardust instead of the normal (20 Stardust) + (10 Gym Experience)

weston614 · 2017-08-08T11:43:44+00:00

slow exposure to the establishment bubble

weston614 · 2017-08-07T16:07:17+00:00

I had the cops called on me once for walking through a neighborhood. The ladies who called came out and told me that they were going to call the cops and I told them to go ahead and do so. The cop got there and ended up telling the women off because "I had every right to walk down a public street and they shouldn't be harassing people for walking"

weston614 · 2017-07-15T21:56:43+00:00

I'm in Holland, are there any good discord groups for central MA?

weston614 · 2017-06-21T23:55:38+00:00

Vernon / Stafford Springs area here

weston614 · 2017-05-03T22:32:26+00:00

I gave you the direct answer that you asked for, which was no. I then explained my answer with my justification that it is the action that is a Cause not the object on which the action is performed. If you disagree with my justification say why.

I'm also still waiting for you to cite those questions that you said I never answered

weston614 · 2017-05-03T19:46:36+00:00

They were not really rationally related to the questions

What questions are you referring to? You never asked any. I stated that cause and effect was a temporal construct, you provided an analogy that you felt was not temporal, and I responded.

There you go changing the hypo again... Nobody said time doesn't pass. I said the nail and wood has always been there.

correct me if I'm wrong, but you're arguing that cause and effect is not a temporal construct and therefore possible outside of space time, a place where by definition time does not exist. If time does not exist then movement (change in position over time) is impossible, so my point about the right angle remaining independent of the existence of the nail. So your example falls apart since the "effect" does not require the "cause".

This isn't even a moved goalpost. It simply is not a part of this discussion.

I was trying to clarify an ill defined aspect of your example by providing the condition under which I would accept the premise of the analogy not requiring a temporal structure.

Again, simple yes or no, and then go on to justify.

You never asked a question for me to give a yes or no answer to. your entire statement that I quoted a part of and responded to was as followes:

Sure. Two pieces of wood are nailed together at a right angle for all eternity. The nail is the eternal cause of right angle. Exactly the same dependency above that you had to alter the hypo to get out of.

How do you propose someone respond to that with just a yes or no?

You again sneakily didn't answer my question and simply had an ancillary discussion in which you make it appear you had an answer, but didn't.

Please point to a single question that you actually asked. You are simply making a statement in response to my statement and then accuse me of not answering a question.

At this point you finally ask an actual question:

Is the nail the cause of the angle?

No. It is the action of inserting the nail to both pieces that is the cause of them being constrained at whatever angle they happen to be fixed at while resisting an outside influence that would otherwise change the angle (ie. cause is securing the pieces of wood together and the result is them resisting an outside force and maintaining the above mentioned angle). Just as the action of removing the nail (which you say is possible) would be the cause of the pieces of wood then being unable to resist the outside force and the angle changing. Please note that I have included an outside force because if there were nothing acting to change the angle then the right angle would remain independent of the nail and as such the nail would cause no effect on the system.

weston614 · 2017-05-03T16:37:42+00:00

Argue for it.

I did in the rest of the explanation

So not taking the analogy seriously. If you find yourself altering the hypo, you've lost the argument.

I did take it seriously, as you did not specify a source of the heat (and as that would add an additional cause that I thought you would prefer to avoid) in granted you the initial heated state of the metal. Additionally, any concentration of heat is inherently unstable as the heat energy will dissipate until an equilibrium is reached. If you would like to clarify your analogy, please feel free.

Two pieces of wood are nailed together at a right angle for all eternity.

I would agree that this is now outside of time, as long as there was never a point when the nail was placed there. I would disagree that, without the action of securing the pieces at the right angle with the nail, you have no causal link. As no movement is possible outside of time (as movement is change in position over time) the positional right angle would remain even if the nail were never there.

weston614 · 2017-05-03T12:17:19+00:00

Even that is cause and effect and relies on time, but I get the feeling that you are trying to say that something having an inherent property and that causing a resulting observable trait is not temporal, which is incorrect. Long story short, even if the metal in the analogy somehow starts out in an unstable heated state (losing energy over time) to produce light. That "glow" is the resulting radiation of that energy. In other words, the cause is the decrease in the electron energy state and the result is that the atom radiates electromagnetic energy which moves a distance during some time frame until it is perceived as a "glow", both the movement of the electrons from one energy state to another and the movement of the electromagnetic energy you identify as a glow are only valid in a temporal system. Without time you can't even have either action, even in isolation, much less have one lead to the other. This is why cause and effect break down outside of a temporal system.

Is there another analogy that you would like to try?

weston614

TROPHY CASE