Melllvar @ charonn0 @startrek.website

*Seer* of the tapes! *Knower* of the episodes!

---

Read more

Posts

14

Comments

1,561

Joined

2 yr. ago

"Make out" makes out so many things.

"Here come the test results: 'You are a horrible person'. That's what it says, 'a horrible person'. We weren't even testing for that!"

Beat me to it. Also, please remove me from this mailing list.

A Nintendo64 with several game cartridges. It's a little flaky, but it still works for the most part.

That's terrible

Pfft. Real programmers use butterflies

Carthago delenda est!

You shouldn't help old ladies cross the street anyway

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JESczegwk0g

If you enjoy Kingdom of Loathing then see also West of Loathing and Shadows Over Loathing

The trick is to bounce both legs but in opposite directions. When one is going up the other is going down, cancelling each other out.

One cannot reign innocently: the insanity of doing so is evident. Every king is a rebel and a usurper.

-Louis Antoine de Saint-Just, 1792

Or, put in modern terms: There is no such thing as an innocent billionaire.

Left4Dead

Fatal flaw: Versus mode (PvP) with random strangers is almost always awful. Only well-balanced teams of roughly equal skill can have a good time, which is unlikely when playing with randos.

As opposed to the co-op campaigns where it's OK if some players are better than others because we're all on the same team and a good player can carry several n00bs.

It could certainly be used as evidence in your favor. Whether it by itself would be enough to exonerate you would depend on things like the evidence against you and how much weight the jury gave to your records.

These are known as souvenir plots. Generally, you aren't buying the land, but rather you're buying a contractual right to prevent the actual owner from developing the land.

Californian. No.

It wouldn't solve any problems that can't be solved by other means, and it would create new problems that we haven't had to worry about before. It'd be a net loss for everyone involved.

Californian. No.

It wouldn't solve any problems that can't be solved by other means, and it would create new problems that we haven't had to worry about before. It'd be a net loss for everyone involved.

Insufficient data for a meaningful answer.

From what I can tell it's a tweet in which they "recommend" his nomination, rather than nominate him themselves.

While members of national legislatures are allowed to nominate people for a Nobel prize, national governments per se are not.

Try HTTrack: https://www.httrack.com/