Anyone know what governs that behavior?

make it follow a numeric number (as opposed to spelled out).

@Chrisp and dangermouse:

Chrisp - please site ANY study or evidence that proves cigars ARE more harmful. Just like in a court of law, it is the burden of those making the defamatory statements to prove they are true. It was stated by Sayjo that they are. Barring evidence to the contrary, I would equate them equally.

I have no problem with someone using pot. I actually think it should be legal. I have a problem with people saying everyone should try ANY drug at least once (which you did say), and that includes tobacco or alcohol (I accept nicotine and alcohol are drugs). What about people with known addictive personalities? Should they try an addictive drug?

And danger, I didn't say pot was not OK. I said it was illegal and that there was ni proof that cigars were worse for the body than pot. If they make it legal, puff your brains to oblivion. Fine.

Both - my biggest problem is with the encouraging "everyone" to "try it once."

And one side note. Logic is absolute. It is either logical or not. Logical thinking can be flawed, however, and is in degrees based on the understanding of the elemnts of logic. I'm a reasonably logical thinker, but even I make mistakes. However, any given answer is either logical or it is not. As rlumley pointed out, if it isn't, then the degree to which it is illogical can be measured.

"What about people with known addictive personalities? Should they try an addictive drug?" Like me... I have a very addictive personality.

Good point rlumley. Even though I am open minded about drugs I don't think they are for everybody. Some people are much more vulnerable to addiction than others.

Well to be fair, I didn't make that point, it was Draugnar, I was merely agreeing with him. But that's one of the primary reasons I'll never drink/smoke/do drugs.

And your body thanks you for it, rlumley. I know I will eventually regret my love for a fine cigar and a vodka martini or two when I'm playing poker, but some things just go together...

So I'm a troll now? lol

Who called you a troll? Did I miss something? We were having a spirited debate about cigars versus pot. I didn't thank any aspect of it was trolling on either part.

I called him a troll. And I stand by it. There's no way someone could have misinterpreted what I was saying, and I'm not going to respond to him anymore.

Ah, OK. I just interpret willful misinterpretation as a desperate attempt to distract and redirect the conversation away from the current flow as the poster wishes to no longer try to support an untennable position.

Well, I view it as him getting bored arguing and deciding he's going to try and frustrate me as much as possible. Which is why I'll no longer respond to him.

Are you taking notes hellalt?

Zing!

I think you just like to categorize people as trolls, rlumley.
Btw how are your canaries doing?
:p

This from the person who says their hobbies include:
Diplomacy, Forum Trolling, Internet, Tennis, Music

LOL, priceless. Sorry, just had to get the dig in Hellalt. By the way, I appreciate the listing in you profile...

As far as i know you are the only troll around.
Let me remind you the incident when I needed an account sitter for 2 weeks.
You offered to take the job, I sent you your password through personal message, yet you let me resign from all 3 active games I was playing in.
I think that applies for troll behavior

ps: I don't know if it's considered unacceptable or not but I' ll sure ally with anyone needed to kick your ass in the TMG when we face each other. Don't take it personally.

the above message was for rlumley not Draugnar.
Draugnar, it was a pleasure doing business with you.

Hellalt: I do remember rlumley telling you he'd lose your games so it's your stupidity for taking him on.

I never ever said I'd sit for you... Please show me where I did. You can search my profile if you want.

I searched that for you... Did you actually take me seriously?

Lol. I never bothered to check that thread again, and I ignore all of the PMs you send me, since you just spammed me.

Sorry for the miscommunication though, that really sucks.

Also: I seldom to never check my private messages unless I know I have one. I need an envelope to tell me to check. :-P

that's just bullshit and you are plainly a jackass.
i dont care if you were joking saying that you d play my games.
you shouldnt have said it at all
i also dont care if you considered my personal messages as spam
the fact remains that while i had other oprion for an account sitter you offered, i sent you a password and numerous personal messages and yet you wrote me to your balls.
well, like i said wait till we play together
for fucks sake you are number one in my shit list you sore loser

copying from the relevant thread at http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?viewthread=462951#462951:

dmkgiph (100 )
05 Aug 09
I can watch your games for you, if you still need someone to

rlumley (792 )
05 Aug 09
I'll sit them... I promise I won't make you go CD because you're a troll...
Hmm... Maybe I shouldn't have said that.

hellalt Online (28 )
05 Aug 09
ok rlumley
it's yours!
check out your home for a personal message with the password

Sayjo the Lion-Hearted Online (772 )
05 Aug 09
I would've done it for you hellalt

Haha... OK. Well I don't feel bad at all if that's the attitude you're going to take.

Again, I'm sorry about the miscommunication, but thanks for letting me know that you'll be coming after me in ever game. I'll be ready for you.

Draugnar, I didn't realize that Sayjo had made the claim earlier. I can definitely show you evidence that nicotine in general is a more dangerous drug than cannabis. I can't find (I didn't look) any definitive evidence that cigars are better or worse than a joint because I don't think such research has been done. I agree with you that cigars smoking is healthier than cigarette smoking, but obviously cigars are not without their damages, and many experts will argue that cigars are just as dangerous as cigarettes, if not more. There is information regarding the health effects of cigars as compared to cigarettes, and perhaps if you accept that tobacco in general is more harmful than cannabis and that cigars are not significantly healthier than cigarettes, you can accept that cigars are not healthier than cannabis.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/cigar-smoking/AN01515
http://www.cleanlungs.com/education/features/cigars.html
http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/opinion/columnists/tm_headline=are-cigars-healthier-than-fags-&method=full&objectid=18840939&siteid=64736-name_page.html
http://clinicaltrials.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/cigars

I already qualified my recommendation... I specifically said in a previous post that hallucinogenics are not for everyone, and I listed people who have a history of mental illness in their family as one of the groups that should not try hallucinogenics. Addictive personalities is less worrying because hallucinogenics very, very rarely form even psychological dependency. It's just not the sort of drug you can get addicted to, don't lump all drugs under a label of addiction. Obviously I also don't recommend to children or anyone else who's particularly irresponsible. Do you really think I'm suggesting something so crazy? I wouldn't recommend most things or most drugs to most people, but actually magic mushrooms is one of those things. I wouldn't even recommend alcohol or tobacco. You're putting undue emphasis on the word "drug" just because it's loaded with stigma. If I had suggested that everyone should try skydiving, to a shooting range, or go scuba diving with sharks at least once in their life you would not have reacted so violently.

"My point is this: How are hallucinogens any more useful than reading a book of optical illusions? Or reading the paragraph you just wrote? (While I did know some of that, I didn't know all of it)"

Ah, but surely you know that not everything there is to know can be done by reading or learning about something. Some things must be done to be truly understood. There are many forms and processes of understanding and learning we each have, and while some of them work through simple mimicry or learning by reading or listening, others definitely take a more hands-on approach. It would be exceedingly difficult for me to explain what it is that hallucinogenics have that a book doesn't, or I'd be able to write a book! Like I said earlier, it's trying to explain the colour orange to someone who has never seen orange before. They can read up about the colour orange all they like, but is it the same as actually experiencing it? I have to admit that for all it's wonders, language is terribly impoverished in the realm of hallucinogenic experiences, and the best you get is a wishy synesthetic monologue that sounds like bullshit trippyness for the sake of being trippy. I hope that I can just express the inexpressibility of it all. Trust me on this, before I took magic mushrooms, I was just as sure as you were that I had a good deal of scepticism and care when it came to my internal biases... but you have no idea how deep your assumptions run until you've had them stripped away from you.

I'm not understanding your point with physics now... I've already accepted that physics is a useful and incredibly accurate science and that it is indication of an external reality than can be known through science. What are you trying to say? That we cannot be deceived of this? I said that we already naturally are deceived of this and that even what you are calling a law is just an approximation. It doesn't change by day... it just changes sometimes depending on the scale, whether it's the cosmic or sub-atomic or somewhere in between. It's amazing how far we've come, but it's important not to rest on your laurels, and your Objectivism doesn't mean that magic mushrooms cannot be a valuable learning experience.

Objectivism may not, but my Objectivism certainly does. I disagree with Ayn Rand on a number of things. She loved cigarettes. Of course, the dangers of smoking were not nearly as well known back then. But I digress.

Your point (And I do not wish to put words in your mouth, so correct me if I'm wrong) is that hallucinogens are valuable because they demonstrate the frailties of human perception. And those flaws are only relevant to real life if they manifest themselves in the real world. And if they manifest themselves in the real world, they can be studied by means other than hallucinogens.

My point with physics, originally, was that they are related to the reality, because they are held constant. But that point is moot now, since we've moved on.

Despite the "evidence", it is a very subjective opinion. To me, anything that damages brain cells is more harmful than that which damages the rest of the body, even with cancer. My brain is the single most important part of what makes me, well, me. It allows me to do what I do for a living and do it well. Without it, I'd be an utter fool. So I'll risk cancer over killing brain cells anyday.

Draug, I think you're an utter fool anyway. :-P

Sorry, the door was just wide open...