Surely you mean what is important is what it does for the bottom 20% of people.

How do you do tactically meaning combat then?

5 & 8 & 9 really seem like steps backward IMHO. Avoiding attacks of opportunity was an interesting tactical problem. If you want to get rid of that I'd go with Zones-of-control rather than none-at-all.

Lets say I'll be examining this "evidence" my self. I'm not quite sure they are up to the job, and I feel I should give them a hand.

I recall my linguistics professor saying the "ax" actually is an older form of the word that has been preserved. So it's not so much improper as much as it is antiquated.

Also, languages go through regular mutatations, this is just another one of them. I don't think "ax" is any different than "pail" vs "bucket" or "pop" vs "soda". It's just that it is associated with a poorer demographic, but that doesn't make it any less valid English.

PS- Yes, I am the kind of person that will use "thee" and "thou" if necessary to disambiguate from "you".

Due you think that crowdsourcing might help? Anyone know what it takes to get an experiment going? I mean if we can get $2M for Wasteland 2, surely we could get at least $2M for a fusion experiment. Maybe more if we could get tax deducatable receipts... and a cool (or should I say "hot"? ;) ) t-shirt.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/131/351/eb6.jpg?1307463786

I think your comment distracts more than anything. The point is that you should only be responsible for your direct actions. Driving drunkenly and hitting a child and nearly hitting a child should, arguably, have the same sentence since what differentiated the two was not intended. Now, whether you want to charge both with manslaughter or neither is a separate matter.

that would harm one of the underlying principles of common law many people agree with, the equal protection provision. Perhaps then its time to revisit common law, most of the world does without it. While the idea of it seems good (i.e. more consistency in interpretation) it means that reading a law is near meaningless until you read every ruling on that law. There was a lot of interesting pieces written contrasting the two systems following the Amanda Knox acquittal.

I will say one thing about Mormons... of all the people I've met of different religions, Mormons were by far the nicest and most genuine people. Try meeting some Bahai people. They make me wish I believed in God.

Yup. My parents were academics and got in when there was less competition. They presume everybody who is smart would have it so easy. They still do as they badger me to do a PhD and I try to explain that a MSCD or a SCJD or ScrumMaster certification would boost my career more (already have a MSc in CS in a field where only Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo! work which are no near any of my family).

At the age of 12? Most definitely, I already felt like I was "missing out of everything" and "the odd one out" just because my parents were immigrants and for many years afterwards. I think it was only after bouncing back from the depression that claimed my early 20 that I felt able to do things differently.

Isn't the first $2 the easiest and the last $2 the hardest? Won't that just lead to lots of tech demos and no products?

Actually, it's more like misrepresentation of credentials, to which free speech doesn't apply. There are countries where calling yourself a engineer has legal consequences.

Next, I'll start calling myself a doctor (as in "code doctor") or surgeon ("code surgeon"). ;)

The question becomes how long will it take for the culture to shift when it has long become accustomed to underbidding.