99% confidence that you work for the military/industrial complex. If so, resign and get a job that contributes to society

He says, using the computer which is a direct result of WW2 code breaking technology, across the Internet, a direct descendant of Arpanet.

Depends on what kind of LongBow you mean.

Bioware/EA's MMO Star Wars The Old Republic is a counter to that - 8 huge personal (single player, in a multiplayer world) storylines, one for each basic character class, with minimal and entirely optional multiplayer content until you get to the endgame, at which point it becomes almost totally about multiplayer in a traditional MMO grind-fest for gear.

Alternatively, you can do the tutorial planet, then jump immediately into PvP, PvP Dogfighting, flashpoints, etc etc, i.e. do nothing BUT multiplayer, while hitting three or four missions per planet to progress the storyline.

You get to play your way.

Obligatory old joke:

One day, at a U2 concert in (insert traditional butt of jokes for your area, I'll say Newfoundland,) Bono stops the music and starts clapping his hands, slowly, rhythmically.

As he gazes out over the crowd, still clapping slowly, he intones 'Every time *clap* I clap *clap* my hands, *clap* a child *clap* in Africa *clap* dies *clap* of starvation. *clap*'

From the audience comes up the outraged cry of 'Then stop fucking clapping, you idiot!'

(b) it's an easy mental barrier between people venting at you, and, well, you (because they're not yelling at me, they're yelling at "Antonio".)

When your introductory training includes psychological coping mechanisms, rethink your decision to be there. :-)

Absolutely. There are all sorts of reasons why a person lands in jail. Some are in their control, some aren't.

But, to tie this back to the original poster and to the various responses, is it entirely beyond the pale to even entertain the notion that, possibly, due to some combination of nature and nurture, of social upbringing, evolutionary selection, and everything else, that maybe, just maybe, women and men are different?

And that, for some things, those differences may prove to be helpful or harmful? Isn't it better to have the discussion, to figure out what the differences are, and in some cases, make allowances or adjustments for them?

Premise: Women in western society, for a variety of factors both social and biological, tend to be more collaborative than adversarial. Assertion: Wikipedia editing is an adversarial process, in the same way the US legal system is adversarial: people argue their positions with the intent that the best argument wins. Implication of assertion: many women, who prefer collaboration to adversarial systems, will avoid Wikipedia.

To me, that is in no way sexist, demeaning, or anything else negative. But many people, whom I would term 'overly PC,' would attack me for even putting that little paragraph together.

Faith is defined as 'belief without evidence.' In other words, and *at best*, one makes a knowledge claim without any supporting fact or evidence whatsoever.

The problem is, 'belief without evidence' rapidly tends to turn into 'belief *despite* evidence.' In other words, the same knowledge claim is often made *despite* clear and contradictory evidence. That's a hell of a way to run a railroad.