OP Here:
Thanks. This is the kind of situation I'm in, and your suggestions seem like good one's. I'll look into those.

OP Here.
Holy hell, that's a lot of assumptions about me! It's really not offensive and it kinda makes me laugh and I guess my submission doesn't really describe my entire situation so I can't really blame you. I would probably tend to agree with you about most cases of people who live overseas, especially doing NGO work.
An honest, "Thank you" for caring about my marriage and family.
I may be flattering myself but I really think my marriage is awesome. My wife and I love each other immensely and we support each other quite a bit in the work we do.
My basic situation is this: Work situation aside, we have our kids in bed by about 7:30 or 8 each night and after that we have very few entertainment options. We don't do this every single night but we often find ourselves watching a movie or TV show on DVD together. This works well and I have no complaints, it's just that our DVD collection has been watched enough that we are both looking for new entertainment options when we want to wind down together in the evenings. I'm just looking for ideas for how to spend 4-8 hours per week with my wife and engage her in what I find to be a rewarding and entertaining pastime; computer gaming. I have almost completely stopped computer gaming after getting married and it wasn't a hard decision to make. I gladly left those games behind when we got married and I don't begrudge the sacrifice at all. I'm not addicted to anything, she's not looking for more attention from me, I just want to do something new with her and I thought the Slashdot community might be a resource for finding out.

Submitter here.
Yes, it is very weird. I don't really hang out with other expats who have that mentality. I live here and I'm happy to be here. It's my home, my kids were born here, they are citizens of this country and I don't want to create an American bubble around myself and my family. I'm actually a missionary and, let me assure you, I spend a LOT of time with the culture I'm in. I'm not trying to avoid spending time with Mozambicans. I'm trying to find an interactive activity I can do with my wife in the evenings after our kids go down. We don't have many board games, we can't go out (they kids are asleep in the house) and we are often sitting around without many options for evening entertainment except movies or TV shows on DVD. I want to invite her to join something I really enjoy doing (computer gaming) and find a lot of value in. It's nothing to do with avoiding local culture or neglecting my kids (as other posters have assumed).

OP Here.
I am often out exploring Mozambique. It's not about that. I am looking for something my wife and I can do in the evenings together (2 or 3 times per week) instead of watching something from our drying up movie collection. It wouldn't interfere with time with my kids, they are sleeping by 8:00 PM and we can't go out after that with them down in the house. I just want something I can spend 4-8 hours per week on with my wife in the evenings after 8 PM.

OP here.
What I guess I didn't explain in the summary is that I DON'T game anymore since being married (and especially since having the kids). What I DO do is have 2 or 3 nights per week where my wife and I watch a movie or TV show on DVD together. I'm currently out of fresh movies and shows so that's why I'm looking for a game we can spend 4-8 hours per week on. Nothing addicted, nothing excessive, nothing even while the kids are awake (I have 3 under 3 and they go to bed by 7:30-8:00 PM). Just something to do to have fun in the evenings with my wife. Is there anything (besides things like Minecraft) that we could both enjoy together?

Ok, honestly, I wish people could try to be a little less partisan. Both men were good men and would try to serve this country. Sure they both have selfish motivations for some of the things they do but, seriously, who the hell wouldn't in that position???.
Let's all agree that, though Obama may do things differently than you personally think he should, he's going to lead America as best he can.
I'm generally conservative/libertarian in my politics and most of my friends align in that direction. I infrequently use Facebook and when I looked this morning I was disgusted with the ridiculous epithets and flat out doucheiness of a LOT of people who call themselves "Christians" or at least moral people.
Obama is a good man. I would lead a bit differently than I but he's NOT a "Baby Killer", the "Antichrist", the "Nigger in the White House", or any other hateful and decidedly unchristian thing so many morally ugly people are saying about him.
He's your president. He's your supreme leader. He's under tremendous pressure and stress to serve America and her interests. Speak of him that way or shut the hell up.

How possible would it be to do very subtle Photoshop (or the GIMP) changes to ensure someone goes through the expedited process? Heck, terrorism aside, I'D do it just to avoid the cancer machines.

I am genuinely curious to know what you mean by "stand up and put these extremist assholes in their place". As in violently remove them from office? Graffiti the sides of buildings? Stand in the middle of intersections and yell about Rep Broun? Seriously, what do you suggest?
Do you really think someone who self-identifies as the same religion as Rep Broun could just call up CNN and say "I want to put that extremist asshole in his place" and CNN would show up at his house with a camera and give him the opportunity to say "Not all of us who call ourselves $religion_name agree with that one guy who does $crazy_shit and calls himself $religion_name!"
I'm honestly curious what you think someone should do to as a matter of "get your asses up" in that regard.

But here's the thing; the WORST score for the USA in the metric used was the proportion of foreign contributors to the scientific output and of foreign students in tertiary education. So the SMALLEST contributor to the ranking of the USA was the foreign scientists that helped produce science. This means that although Canadian, UK, Swedish, German, or other nationality scientists may want to go get paid in America, they are making a smaller difference in the output of the science in the USA than foreign nationals are making in their own countries!

Heck, even the proportion of international students in 3rd ed in the USA is in that metric so this means that, as compared to the other countries in this study, the USA has a very low proportion of international students in science courses and a very low proportion of international contributors to its research.

Look in the link to the study in my GP post. Under point 2.3 is the definition of their "Connectivity" metric and under point 3.3 it explains the USA's low reliance on international collaboration in research.

From the description this seems like a stupid metric that would be obviously skewed towards countries with higher population. With a Sweden's population of almost 9.5 million verses the USA's 315 million one would HOPE that the scientific research output is significantly higher. While TFS doesn't go into depth about the actual metric, I figured I'd need to do some reading through some links.
I just looked at the report and it looks like the metric is more than that.

It has things like

• Amount spent on tertiary ed (resources like "per student" "percent of GDP" "per population head" etc)
• Proportion of female students in tertiary ed
• Proportion of international students in tertiary ed
• Total articles produced by higher ed facilities (gross AND per capita)

So it looks like that might not be that bad of a metric after all. It's far from perfect but there are probably few if any that are. All in all, I'm impressed that the USA is ranked number 1.

When looking through the ACTUAL scores of the different countries the USA scores a dismal 37 out of 50 in the "Proportion of international students in 3rd ed and proportion of articles co-authored by international collaborators". Where the USA far and away blows away the rest of the field is in the actual scientific article output (weighted by gross and per capita as noted above).

All in all, it's an interesting report that seems to fly in the face of most of slashdot's readership's (mine included) perception of the direction of the education system in the USA. Maybe most of the bad news is at the secondary education level?