Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)
On 2005-03-28, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd4dr5j.qip.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x6.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-03-26, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnd4aatv.n9b.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x6.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>> On 2005-03-25, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:slrnd481ra.cib.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x6.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>>>>>>> Psychatrists usually don't try to murder their
>>>>>>>>>> patients, though.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Depends on your definition/s. The ceasation of others' existence
>>>>>>>>> ranks
>>>>>>>>> pretty highly up there in the candidates for said definition,
>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They don't go around buthering people
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Exactly./
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Huh? And that was butchering.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh. Sorry. Thought it was 'bothering' and you meant a 'Then' instead
>>>>> of
>>>>> a
>>>>> 'They'... argh. Why, again, don't you want us to simply point out
>>>>> your
>>>>> apparent spelling/grammar mistakes when we see them?
>>>>
>>>> Well, the problem is the apparent... Anyway - point made.
>>>
>>> *nods slightly*
>>>
>>> Incidentally, how accurate is the cultural image of the men in white
>>> coats
>>> who come to take one away?
>>
>> You have to do a *lot* for that to happen. Never seen it in real life.
>
> Ah. Good. What would 'a lot' be? And what's the difference between the 'a
> lot' that you do which results in men in white coats coming to take one away
> and the 'a lot' that you do which results in men in uniforms coming to take
> one down?
See that part about running amok and the like.
>>>>>>>> Unless you pose a threat to
>>>>>>>> your surroundings they can't even make you come if you don'd want
>>>>>>>> to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's good, though there's always the question of what they use to
>>>>>>> determine whether you pose such a threat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, if you start pushing people from bridges, or do an amok run...
>>>>>> As long as you don't actively or passively kill anyone (or put in
>>>>>> danger, or harm) there shouldn't be a problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reasonable. *makes mental note*
>>>>
>>>> If you have no influential friends, that is... some people get away with
>>>> just about anything.
>>>
>>> Hah. (Note to selves: get influential friends. *amusement*)
>>
>> For that you should get some oil fields or somehing like that. Perhaps a
>> good running weapon business with the one or other nuclear warhead now
>> and again...
>
> Hmm. Definitely, /possession/ of nuclear weapons could be useful... what
No, it's just annoying to handle them correctly.
> about inventing a renewable, cheap, 'environment-friendly' source of energy
> and selling it to the rest of the world, undercutting everyone else, while
> keeping our [exact] method/s a secret?
Then nobody would believe you it's environment-friendly and besides you
can't enter the global energy market without a certain amount of
inspections by government people. And Greenpeace would be after you as
well.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)
Official AGC feedback maniac
"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."
"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."
"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."
Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
On 2005-03-28, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnd4dr5j.qip.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x6.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2005-03-26, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnd4aatv.n9b.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x6.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>> On 2005-03-25, The Triad <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>>>> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:slrnd481ra.cib.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x6.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>>>>>>>>> Psychatrists usually don't try to murder their
>>>>>>>>>> patients, though.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Depends on your definition/s. The ceasation of others' existence
>>>>>>>>> ranks
>>>>>>>>> pretty highly up there in the candidates for said definition,
>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They don't go around buthering people
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Exactly./
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Huh? And that was butchering.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh. Sorry. Thought it was 'bothering' and you meant a 'Then' instead
>>>>> of
>>>>> a
>>>>> 'They'... argh. Why, again, don't you want us to simply point out
>>>>> your
>>>>> apparent spelling/grammar mistakes when we see them?
>>>>
>>>> Well, the problem is the apparent... Anyway - point made.
>>>
>>> *nods slightly*
>>>
>>> Incidentally, how accurate is the cultural image of the men in white
>>> coats
>>> who come to take one away?
>>
>> You have to do a *lot* for that to happen. Never seen it in real life.
>
> Ah. Good. What would 'a lot' be? And what's the difference between the 'a
> lot' that you do which results in men in white coats coming to take one away
> and the 'a lot' that you do which results in men in uniforms coming to take
> one down?
See that part about running amok and the like.
>>>>>>>> Unless you pose a threat to
>>>>>>>> your surroundings they can't even make you come if you don'd want
>>>>>>>> to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's good, though there's always the question of what they use to
>>>>>>> determine whether you pose such a threat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, if you start pushing people from bridges, or do an amok run...
>>>>>> As long as you don't actively or passively kill anyone (or put in
>>>>>> danger, or harm) there shouldn't be a problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reasonable. *makes mental note*
>>>>
>>>> If you have no influential friends, that is... some people get away with
>>>> just about anything.
>>>
>>> Hah. (Note to selves: get influential friends. *amusement*)
>>
>> For that you should get some oil fields or somehing like that. Perhaps a
>> good running weapon business with the one or other nuclear warhead now
>> and again...
>
> Hmm. Definitely, /possession/ of nuclear weapons could be useful... what
No, it's just annoying to handle them correctly.
> about inventing a renewable, cheap, 'environment-friendly' source of energy
> and selling it to the rest of the world, undercutting everyone else, while
> keeping our [exact] method/s a secret?
Then nobody would believe you it's environment-friendly and besides you
can't enter the global energy market without a certain amount of
inspections by government people. And Greenpeace would be after you as
well.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)
Official AGC feedback maniac
"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."
"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."
"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better...
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."
Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram