Sayonara

The best thing about iPod is the seamless integration with iTunes. Apparently.

I don't really see it as unfair, compared to say - allowing you to come on here (allegedly drunk) and changing people's names to have sexual or scatalogical connotations, while disadvantaging them by not letting them know that they are talking to someone with a history of trolling. Despite the fact that when you previously apologised you were at it again the very next day, I'd certainly hope that - as you suggest here - you're starting to get the idea.

I'm often frightful at it on here, which is why that one stood out

The only reason they aren't carbon-neutral is because we take parts of them and tie it up in products. On a long enough time line, most of those end up being burned anyway.

The possible outcomes of your actions do not change the fact that you do have other options. Maybe you think that the risk to yourself if you fail outweighs the benefits of you succeeding, so you would choose to flee or murder someone, but other people aren't so banal in their thought processes.

I think my post was a bit more diplomatic.

Extrasense: Since you have replied by copying and pasting the content of someone else's file, then posting again with your flawed interpretation, I am simply going to repeat the one point you are ignoring: Trees are virtually carbon-neutral.

Maybe he just has really unsafe stairs.

Gah.

Or disable. Trickier maybe, but better for everyone if you pull it off. Punching, not shooting. Punching.

Artorius is Spaceman, previously known as philbo1965uk, both of whom were banned for trolling.

I want to see what else he's got

That's not really news, unless the diseases are genetic conditions as opposed to pathogenic infections.

Not only that, but the signal patterns in the brain are not handled in anything approaching the same fashion, neither is instruction processing.

If Blike had said "Rakasha's points are worthless because he stabs babies in the head", that would have been an ad hominem. You can't wave away a request for clarification of things you have said just by going on the offensive with random accusations.

If we are going to find life on Mars, then isn't giving NASA the money to go there worthwhile?

Well yes, that too.

I think we're all agreed that this is bollocks. Next!

Yes it is.

I take it you meant "It's not only irrelevant", based on your prior post? Perhaps Douglas thinks only murderers get the death penalty, in which case he can be forgiven for taking that view. What has the bible got to do with a universal definition of morality? Are the courts a Christian institution? What the jury sees as legal is, as I have pointed out in the very post you are replying to (and you are simply repeating the error), not necessarily the right thing to do. I know it's difficult to divine the correct course of action - that's my POINT. The law exists to defend the rights that have been afforded by society to citizens. It is not a means of enforcing adherence to random religious beliefs, nor is it a means of exacting revenge. Defence of the rights of individuals, or groups of individuals, should always seek to have the minimum necessary impact (i.e. - not excessive) on the rights of the defendent; otherwise the system is inherently hypocritical. That is why incarceration is preferable to the extreme measure that is execution.