Tournament sounds interesting, will there be a live leaderboard?
Also, the scoring system isn't very clear. Is it total wagered, total won, highest final total, or highest peak balance? Hey TwitchySeal. You're right I didn't explain it well, I'll add some more of this info at the top. There will be a live leaderboard, you can watch as players wager, win and lose and actively see their rank change in the tourney. A new tab will appear on Sunday for the tournament next to "recent games" and " largest wins" where you can watch it all take place. The highest final totals will be what prizes are based on. If a player is in the middle of a game at the moment the tournament ends, the buy in of that game will be included in the final total. That makes sense. Something to consider: Optimal strategy will be to wait and see what all the other players do first, and then the last few minutes are hectic with lots of page refreshes. Consider updating the leader board at set increments, instead of trying to make it up to the date up to the second. Maybe every 5 or 10 minutes with a countdown to the next leader board update would make things more interesting and reduce the chances of the outcome being decided by a player disconnecting or a technical issue in the last few seconds. I know this is just a test run, just throwing out some ideas. I think you've got a pretty cool idea. |
|
|
|
Nooooooooo.......... I haven't implied anything so don't be misrepresenting what I have said.I have stated facts that are true and correct and not selective factes or half truths to collaborate with ANY narrative.I am neither Left or Right.I am in favour of reason and rational thought only and for someone to implicate presented facts as a white supremacist form of argument indicates a bias or wilful ingnorance or worse still blatant left wing extremist form of response. I am provoking rational thought which any sane person would be able to interpret as a logical argument.
Ok, be explicit then. Do you think white people are superior to black people when it comes to being a productive member of society? If not, then what is your explanation for the facts. (white vs black crime, income, education, health, etc) |
|
|
|
|
Twitchyseal
Tournament sounds interesting, will there be a live leaderboard?
Also, the scoring system isn't very clear. Is it total wagered, total won, highest final total, or highest peak balance?
|
|
|
|
I received messages that 3 of my comments on this thread were deleted. Upon review, they are all factual information. So the bias is apparent, facts don't matter. 2 decades of actual experience in this subject don't matter.
I've had had a bunch of mine deleted from any thread that deals with "the revolution" And to address the above post, of course more black males age 18-35 are killed by police, in disparity from population make up, they are responsible for +/- HALF of all violent crime although comprising only 1.4% of the US population. They don't want to hear facts because it doesn't massage the false narrative being created. Seems the whiteys should be rioting. The majority of Whiteys are too busy working 9-5 paying for all this while the rest of them are suffering from self loathing on twitter hash tagging or taking the knee oblivious to the divisive agenda they are contributing to. The statistic argument is only a part of the picture here. By implying that black people are just lazy because they're black, or commit crime because they're black, or shouldn't complain about racism because they're black you are implying that black people are generally inferior to white people. Or, in other words, White people are superior to black people. Or, to put it bluntly, these are white supremacist arguments. |
|
|
|
Amy Klobuchar's out of the VP bid and urges Biden to pick a women of color - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/18/us/politics/amy-klobuchar-biden-vice-president.htmlI was hoping for Klobuchar. With how badly Trump's doing in polls, Biden's VP is going to be in charge if Trump were to lose reelection. Klobuchar was probably the least worst out of the bunch. Guess this means Kamala Harris is all locked up? You can look into her Twitter feed and she's playing into the race war so badly. If you think Trump is divisive, I have no doubts Kamala Harris will be worse in regards to race baiting and attempting to push the narrative that everyone's an evil racist. Have no doubt that Trump will air advertisements of Kamala Harris beating Joe Biden with a stick on school busing. Harris reminds me of Hillary Clinton. She's extremely inauthentic and her record is not going to sit well with the far left. Klobuchar was who I was hoping for also. Val Demmings seems to have a real shot now. Black, Female, 27 years as a cop, worked her way up to Police Chief in Orlando and then Congress. She was on the House team during Trumps Senate trial, seemed competent. Kind of the perfect storm for her right now politically though. |
|
|
|
I think the damage will be done by the claim that Trump told President Xi to build more concentration camps for Uighurs (muslims born in China) in China while the US is very publicly 'anti concentration camps'.
<>
Fucking horrible.
You are taking what Bolten is saying that is damaging to Trump at face value. Many in the media also assume anything Trump says to be a lie/fabrication without irrefutable proof. This is a bad double standard to use, and basically prevents any substantive discourse. I blame social media giving incentives to reporters to make crazy claims to get more likes and views. In addition to the US publicly being against concentration camps (a standard set by the administration), Trump's history on religious freedom removes credibility to this claim. Even if this statement was shown to be true, I would want to know how specifically the translators described the concentration camps, and the specific language used by Xi. In 2001, the US basically used an alternate translation of words to get several airmen released from China after a military plane crash. You could use a worse case assumption to conclude that Xi was referring to the concentration camps, but Xi may have described them not as harshly. You're right, it can't be proven one way or the other. But Trumps only rebuttal is just "it's all made up stories, he's just trying to make me look bad, all the sources are fake, the book (which hasn't been published) is getting terrible reviews!" He makes the same play against anyone who criticizes him, whether it's a 4 star general or a reality TV star. It's also been proven countless times that something he calls 'fake news' ends up being proven true weeks or months later. Giving Trump the benefit of the doubt at this point seems very misguided. He's also made it very clear by his actions, or inaction, that he's willing to look the other way on human rights if he thinks being friendly with guys like Duterte, Xi, or Kim Jong Un increases the chances of him being able declare a political victory. It's part of deal making, and it's rarely black and white...but the case of the concentration camps it is black and white. They are horrible and unethical on every level. Looking the other way or deciding against sanctions for whatever reason is one thing, but not caring or even encouraging them? That should not be ok. I think the most likely reality is that Trump did convey the message that Bolton claims he did not because he actually wants Xi to build more concentration camps, just because he genuinely doesn't care whether they exist or not. All that matters is his path to reelection. I would also point out that many of Trump's critics personally profit from what amounts to slave labor out of China, and may even be profiting from these very same concentration camps. I would be interested to see their comments on this particular point in Bolton's book.
This isn't about sweat factorys. They're literally trying to stop millions of Muslims from being Muslim. Give this a read: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/16/world/asia/china-xinjiang-documents.html |
|
|
|
Bolton is claiming in his book that Trump asked President Xi to buy up farm goods to help his re-election campaign.
I have no idea if this is true or not but this will be damaging to Trump politicallynot sure about this. Bolton has always wanted the US to basically be at war with nearly every country that isn’t our ally and even argued that a preemptive nuclear strike against NK would be appropriate. This is approximately the polar opposite of Trumps position on American wars. Bolton may be trying to get revenge for pulling troops out of Syria and/or Germany, he might be trying to get on the anti Trump bandwagon to make a few bucks, or it may be true.
I would expect Trump to get impeached again over this, however I doubt anything will come of it. I doubt impeaching Trump ~2 months (based on an estimate as to when this might happen) before an election probably won’t look good for Democrats, especially considering Trump was just acquitted for doing basically the same thing with another country earlier this year. I am not sure this would even be illegal.
The Trump DOJ sued Bolton yesterday to stop his book from being published on National security grounds, but what I assume is the most damaging excerpt was just published in the newspaper, probably making the suit moot.
I think the damage will be done by the claim that Trump told President Xi to build more concentration camps for Uighurs (muslims born in China) in China while the US is very publicly 'anti concentration camps'. https://www.wsj.com/articles/john-bolton-the-scandal-of-trumps-china-policy-11592419564Beijing's repression of its Uighur citizens also proceeded apace. Trump asked me at the 2018 White House Christmas dinner why we were considering sanctioning China over its treatment of the Uighurs, a largely Muslim people who live primarily in China's northwest Xinjiang Province.
At the opening dinner of the Osaka G-20 meeting in June 2019, with only interpreters present, Xi had explained to Trump why he was basically building concentration camps in Xinjiang. According to our interpreter, Trump said that Xi should go ahead with building the camps, which Trump thought was exactly the right thing to do. The National Security Council's top Asia staffer, Matthew Pottinger, told me that Trump said something very similar during his November 2017 trip to China. I copied the text of the excerpt for anyone unable to access the WSJ article: https://pastebin.com/dvJhENArAnyone interested in the details of these camps should definitely give this a read: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/16/world/asia/china-xinjiang-documents.htmlFucking horrible. |
|
|
|
Hey PopoJeff, you know this guy claims to be a professor? How scary is that? You aren't qualified to be a professor at clown college.
It does not surprise me one bit. There's a reason colleges and universities are referred to as "liberal indoctrination centers." Fortunately, I skipped the college route and went military instead, entering the USN nuclear engineering program. I was able to travel the world for several years of my life and get a true representation of global society. The poorest Americans have NO IDEA how good they have it. The military training and experience offered me the opportunity to get a 6 figure salary afterwards, and I put forth enough effort in OT to send my kids to college. (Not white privilege, but effort that can be achieved by any race) But my kids were warned about the liberal youth groupthink that is prominent at college. They've all remained level headed and discuss with me, the feelings vs facts problem they see at school. Too many youth are influenced by feelings and have a sheltered view of overall society. Are your kids more likely or less likely to be successful because they have a father that was able to send them to college? Will their children (your grandchildren) be more or less likely to be successful because of you? See where I'm going here? |
|
|
|
Get over it
I don't think that's going to work. |
|
|
|
Can you speak in full sentences please. |
|
|
|
whats your oppinion?
It's not either or. If all lives matter, then black lives matter. If black lives don't matter, then all lives don't matter.  |
|
|
|
Is it okay to deface property that does not belong to you? No.
It is okay to change public policy (the statute) just because a small number of people don't like it without the consent of the people? No.
It appears the insurrection is spreading from the US to other Western countries.
Was it ok to toss the Tea into the Boston harbor? No. But also yeah. The Boston tea party was an act of war against a dictator (monarch). I would think twice before comparing what is happening to the Boston tea party. I don’t think these thugs would win in a war. You can hardly compare today to being ruled by a dictator. Ok. What about the civil rights movement, or the protests against the Vietnam war? Why do we have a federal holiday for this guy:   |
|
|
|
Is it okay to deface property that does not belong to you? No.
It is okay to change public policy (the statute) just because a small number of people don't like it without the consent of the people? No.
It appears the insurrection is spreading from the US to other Western countries.
Was it ok to toss the Tea into the Boston harbor? No. But also yeah. |
|
|
|
But yeah, we are very far out and things could change quickly. Time will only tell if this time is different for Trump.
Can't agree more. Seems likely that things will change quickly several times between now and November. Buckle up - if you haven't already. |
|
|
|
Just like all leftist retards, if you don't like facts, simply redefine the words until the facts become irrelevant and you never have to take responsibility for anything! That is what post modernist relativism, critical theory, and Marxism are all about. You can literally organize mobs to murder, beat, burn and loot all you like and call yourself a movement, and suddenly it is ok! No they aren't. They are a movement, not an organization.    |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
