Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 188 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Doshy II (60 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
Interested in Aliens? Read This:
If you know anything about alternate types of life that may exist on other planets - or even on Earth - (e.g: silicon-based as opposed to carbon-based) please write here.
Thank you!
20 replies
Open
micahbales (536 D)
24 Aug 14 UTC
VDiplomacy
Sorry if this has already been covered in another thread; I haven't seen it:

What's the relationship between VDiplomacy and this site?
10 replies
Open
semck83 (229 D (B))
23 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
Smoked salmon
This is an advertisement, but it is one to make y'all's lives better (and it will not profit me in the least).
67 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
24 Aug 14 UTC
"Planet Earth is Blue"...Richard Attenborough Passes Away at 90
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/actor-director-richard-attenborough-dies-at-90/
One more legend gone this summer...so many great nature documentaries, and like Robin Williams, he had a small part in Kenneth Branagh's "Hamlet," announcing that "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead." RIP...Planet Earth's a little less awesome today.
1 reply
Open
Jamiet99uk (100 D)
24 Aug 14 UTC
Forum Thread Stars
Until recently, when you had posted in a thread, a star would appear next to the thread title on your screen, so that when you were scanning the forum, you'd quickly be able to see which threads you were involved in.

Now those little stars are gone. How come?
13 replies
Open
jireland20 (0 D X)
24 Aug 14 UTC
A new game starting for the afternoon come join!
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=146510
2 replies
Open
Kallen (1169 D)
24 Aug 14 UTC
12th Doctor
There's gotta be some DW fans out there. Anybody watch the premiere last night?? What do y'all think of Capaldi? Personally, I LOVE HIM
2 replies
Open
zultar (3900 D Mod (P))
23 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
WebDiplomacy Survey Results August 2014
See below.
13 replies
Open
CommanderByron (569 D Mod (S))
24 Aug 14 UTC
Banner question
Is the time in 24 hour time or 12 hour time? the inclusion of the ":" always confuses me.
3 replies
Open
CommanderByron (569 D Mod (S))
23 Aug 14 UTC
Join if you hate or love me
gameID=146471
FAE 1 day phase 25 point buy in.

If you hate me and you know it come lose your points.
2 replies
Open
bo_sox48 (4238 D Mod (G))
24 Aug 14 UTC
Replacement Opportunity
gameID=144344 needs a replacement French player. Good chance at a solo with some careful maneuvering.
2 replies
Open
JamesYanik (548 D)
24 Aug 14 UTC
1 MORE ANC MED
0 replies
Open
ssorenn (2545 D (G))
23 Aug 14 UTC
Being a stand up ally!!!
I know diplomacy was originally designed as a game to win, but this site and the points and GR seemed to have changed the way you can look at the game.
How do people feel about being a good ally? For example, 5 player left in a game m and 3 are on one side while two are on the other. It's pretty much a stalemate unless one of the sides is willing to stab the other. Should one always stab, or is there something to be said about being a good ally to the end?

Discuss--
34 replies
Open
NigeeBaby (100 D (G))
22 Aug 14 UTC
Alcohol prohibition in Kerala
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-28892073

Now where have we seen that tried and failed ...... grow up India.
Ever considered the reason why there seems to be a problem is because people like drinking alcohol and that's why the ban won't work dickheads
36 replies
Open
micahbales (536 D)
23 Aug 14 UTC
American Empire Anomaly
Howdy folks,

I've noticed that all the Fall of the American Empire IV games are either extremely fast (5 minute rounds) or extremely slow (3 day rounds). Could anyone explain the apparent disinterest in 1-day-round games for this variant?
7 replies
Open
brora (100 D)
23 Aug 14 UTC
Really Noobish Question
How long does a pieces have to be on an SC to claim it?
5 replies
Open
OuFeRRaT (1381 D)
23 Aug 14 UTC
Saturday Live Ancient
fancy a 50 D live (5 min) no messaging ancient variant game?
gameID=146459
2 replies
Open
jimbursch (100 D)
23 Aug 14 UTC
Support hold for unit that is not just holding
There's something that I'm not totally clear on.
2 replies
Open
A_Tin_Can (2258 D)
23 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
AEST live game 9am tomorrow morning?
Living in Australia, it's hard to get in to many live games. Would there be interest in a Sunday morning AEST live game tomorrow? (that's the east coast of Australia for those playing at home).
10 replies
Open
tendmote (100 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
internal criticism
What are your views on "internal criticism", as introduced here:

http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?threadID=1175891#1176008
12 replies
Open
steephie22 (182 D (S))
22 Aug 14 UTC
Linux or Windows server?
Does it matter if the price is the same?
25 replies
Open
KingCyrus (512 D)
20 Aug 14 UTC
American Citizen beheaded by ISIS/IS
See below.

91 replies
Open
CommanderByron (569 D Mod (S))
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
A guide to not being gullible
I am playing a game currently where a player is believing that his "ally" won't stab him even though his ally is well on their way to a solo and the gullible player is tied up fighting me. I am trying to organize against the solo threat but gullible prevails. Any tips for gullible players?
27 replies
Open
trip (312 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
Lusthog Squad-8
Austria, please take down your draw vote.
7 replies
Open
Jamiet99uk (100 D)
21 Aug 14 UTC
All foetuses with Down's Syndrome should be killed before birth.
"It's immoral to bring them into the world"

That's the opinion of Richard Dawkins - and possibly a somewhat controversial opinion at that.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-ouch-28879659
70 replies
Open
jimbursch (100 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
How does pause work?
I see a vote "pause" button. How does that work? I need a definition for the glossary I'm working on:
http://jimbursch.com/webDiplomacy/glossary.php
3 replies
Open
semck83 (229 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
There are currently 11111 active players!
That is all.
12 replies
Open
fulhamish (3408 D)
21 Aug 14 UTC
Climate consensus?
or not?
fulhamish (3408 D)
21 Aug 14 UTC
I have read many times here that there exists a consensus on man-made climate change. Here is a site which shows otherwise. I believe that the site has been set up by the Dutch government and there is lots of interesting, informed and, indeed, respectful debate on these issues.

http://www.climatedialogue.org
Randomizer (100 D)
21 Aug 14 UTC
Everything used in climate consensus are models that may show what will happen. These models are likely to show what will happen if carbon emissions aren't controlled since third world countries want to progress the same way first world countries did before we knew what could happen.

Now whether will will have the hockey stick global warming is uncertain, but what is know is glaciers are melting at the poles, Alaska, Glacier National Park, and other places with historical records. This accelerates the process and all that water is slowly raising the sea level.
tendmote (100 D (B))
21 Aug 14 UTC
Anything is better than this (from Elizabeth Warren):

"We believe in science, and that means that we have a responsibility to protect this Earth."

Whether or not anthropogenic climate change is real, science is not a belief.
JECE (1322 D)
21 Aug 14 UTC
(+4)
'We believe scientists.'

Better, jackass?
abgemacht (840 D (G))
21 Aug 14 UTC
(+7)
OP,

Do you have a script that posts this every so often?
tendmote (100 D (B))
21 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
"Better, jackass?"

Actually, yes, it's clearer. It's a consensus of "90 and 98 percent of climate scientists", not part of a belief system.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-we-should-choose-science-over-beliefs/?page=1
There is a consensus. Climate change and global warming are undeniable. This past winter in the United States was lauded as one of the worst in memory, but if you just erase the last 25 years of data from the record, then it falls at just a little below average.
ghug (4049 D Mod (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
Aww, this is cute.
tendmote (100 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
"but if you just erase the last 25 years of data from the record, then it falls at just a little below average"

That's a mindbender... it seems deliberately crafted to be taken out of context and used to undermine your point. Couldn't you have phrased that as "would be considered only a little below average in the period ending in 1989"?

Maybe I'm an old man and I'm missing the irony here. Is that thing you did considered... "COOL"?
tendmote - I just put it in to point out that the last 25 years have been significantly above average......to the point where they're creating a new normal
Al Swearengen (0 D X)
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+3)
While I believe that you mean well, fulhamish, to instigate inquiry along these lines is certainly trollish.

Many of our forum readers are young and impressionable and so it's important for them to understand that climate change deniers should be comfortably classified along with holocaust deniers and the people who deny that Obama is a US Citizen.
semck83 (229 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
tendmote,

There's a troubling trend recently to redefine the word "believe" to mean "believe without any evidence." It doesn't mean that. If you think that Maxwell's equations describe the behavior of the electromagnetic field, then you believe [in] Maxwell's equations -- and very rationally, too. Belief does not mean there is or isn't evidence. It just means you accept something as true (possibly without reason, possibly with reason).

There are a lot of articles appearing of late (on various sides of issues) trying to distinguish "belief" from accepting science and the like, and it's troubling, because it's very ignorant of epistemology and will only serve to confuse issues in the public's mind.
semck83 (229 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
@Al Swearengen,

If you're really concerned about the education of the young in forming correct beliefs, I propose that every time you urge them to accept a belief based on your classification of its negators as wingnuts, you also provide a link to, you know, actual evidence and argumentation for the point of view you are promoting.

Otherewise, you're just promoting the forming of beliefs based on in-group status, not reason.
Randomizer (100 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
There is a difference between belief in a hypothesis that has been tested and proven versus one that is fitted to past data, but hasn't yet made a confirmed prediction of a future event.

Technical analysis of stock market charts tries to model future stock moves by looking at patterns compared to past charts. It isn't a proven method otherwise technical analysts would be always right in predicting future moves. Quantitative analysts use computer programs to model patterns on past data without regard to what the companies do or make.

This is the same type of extrapolation that some climatologists make for global warming. No need to explain why it's going to happen, just look at the charts.
JECE (1322 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
tendmote:
Oh, really? Jeez, when I checked Merriam-Webster, I thought Elizabeth Warren must have been referring to definitions 3 a, 3 b or perhaps 1. I never imagined she was referring to the only "belief system" on the list of definitions, namely definition 5, otherwise known as Christian Science!
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science
tendmote (100 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
Yeah, points taken. Still, some of it's supporters do present it as a kind of orthodox "correct belief", although I probably shouldn't object every time the word "belief" is used.

I plead guilty to "unfocused beef posted in forum", but I still have some problems with how *the way* dissenters are hounded as idiots.
fulhamish (3408 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
@ abgemacht
‘’OP,

Do you have a script that posts this every so often?’’

Wow! Nasty old fulhamish actually bringing up a topic more than once on webdiplomacy, that would never do would it? Single him out for opprobrium, he has got it coming. Why don’t you stick it where the sun doesn’t shine? ;-)

Seriously though the point of my posting that link was not to engage in another likely over-passionate debate on the anthropocentric global warming (AGW) issue, particularly not with you. It was merely to point out that there are reasonable, albeit as yet minority, alternative viewpoints on the issues of both the existence and extent of AGW. The website I posted reports good debates on these issues. This makes rather a pleasant change from the usual very much-agenda driven sites commonly given as a reference here in the past e.g., http://wattsupwiththat.com/ and, from the other side, http://www.skepticalscience.com/.

I know that you and I have discussed in the past what I view as the ever more apparent failure of climate computer models to predict future patterns. You have more direct experience of modelling than I and, perhaps as a consequence, defend the modellers against attack. I respect your position on this, however, I disagree pointing to the gross failures of prediction. We have not reached a consensus on this and, on a much larger scale, I believe that there is not a consensus on both the existence and extent of AGW.

Unfortunately, I rather doubt that you actually followed the link I gave. Hence, to use smeck’s line of argument, you are in danger not just in having a belief in AGW, but a faith in that presented paradigm, which brooks no other point of view.
fulhamish (3408 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
@Al Swearengen
‘’While I believe that you mean well, fulhamish, to instigate inquiry along these lines is certainly trollish.

Many of our forum readers are young and impressionable and so it's important for them to understand that climate change deniers should be comfortably classified along with holocaust deniers and the people who deny that Obama is a US Citizen.’’

Al thank you for your response, but I am afraid that I couldn’t disagree more. If I were a teacher of a 14, 15, 16….year old and they came to me with a well-reasoned article (rather than, for example, some extract from the popular press) which challenged the accepted view of any scientific matter, I would embrace and encourage that exciting development of critical thought. The teacher might well have a very good budding scientist on their hands. I suspect that, if we are lucky, we can all remember teachers such as that.
tendmote (100 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
Hmm... I had originally interpreted as sarcastic:

"climate change deniers should be comfortably classified along with holocaust deniers and the people who deny that Obama is a US Citizen"

But I guess it is an example of the "orthodoxy" I'm worried about.

One reason this sort of thing bothers me is because doubting one scientific consensus or another is often how science progresses. Although the doubters are *usually* wrong, pronouncements of anathema against dissenters is taking things to far.

I 100% agree with what the climate-change consensus recommends (on national security grounds as well, we should be efficient with our limited resources), but the way it's being put across bugs me.
fulhamish (3408 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
Tendmote, I am sure that you are aware, but T.Kuhn is very good on this behaviour. And if you want a perfect example of the ''faith'' displayed by those who proclaim their consensus on this matter look no further that those climategate emails.

I fully agree with you, by the way, on renewable energy and the need to conserve/secure our necassarily finite resources.
kasimax (243 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
op, are you arguing that man-made climate change isn't happening, or that there isn't a consensus on it?

because one of these is ridiculous, and one of these is just plain wrong.
tendmote (100 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
To add some color to the discussion, there's also this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan.27s_experiment_as_an_example_of_psychological_effects_in_scientific_methodology

In 1909 there was a math mistake that caused the originally accepted charge of the electron to be incorrect. When the experiment was repeated by others, their results continued to cluster around this incorrect value, only slowly moving toward the true value, because they accepted evidence that supported the accepted value and discarded evidence that didn't.

"When they got a number that was too high above Millikan's, they thought something must be wrong—and they would look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a number close to Millikan's value they didn't look so hard."
Randomizer (100 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
Also in the original Milikan's oil drop experiment data, values were excluded from the data that indicated a fractional charge.

I can't remember the name, but in solid state physics for years a wrong theory produced the correct results because the error was canceled out in the calculations.
Putin33 (111 D)
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
How much does the fossil fuel industry pay Fulhamish to post this drivel? Is that why he won't reveal what he does for a living?
Yellowjacket (835 D (B))
22 Aug 14 UTC
(+1)
I agree we should engage this type of OP in exactly the same manner of respectful and considerate dialogue that it deserves. Therefore, allow me to begin by saying:

Fulhamish, you are an idiot and I would advise you to eternally shut your stupid pie-hole, except for the fact that with krellin gone, you are providing valuable comic relief.


25 replies
murraysheroes (531 D (B))
19 Aug 14 UTC
Are you a bit older? Don't have the oppressive need for instant gratification?
I'm looking to start a classic game with 3-5 day phases. I'm currently thinking about a 100+ point buy-in, but I can definitely bend on that. I only ask that you be able to explain any CDs on your record as either a live game or some sort of extenuating circumstance. Anyone interested?
33 replies
Open
2ndWhiteLine (2405 D (B))
20 Aug 14 UTC
Best Movie Scene Ever
Quint's USS Indianapolis speech. Don't try to argue, no other scene in any movie comes close.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9S41Kplsbs
12 replies
Open
Page 188 of 412
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top