Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Most of the PC games were first person shooters. Maybe an RTS or two would liven things up. The console tournies are organized as 2 shooters/2 fighters/2 misc. The PC tournies could be organized in a similar way.
Neither taking names or taking money is particularly difficult. There is no reason to have two people sitting at the front table when one can easily get both jobs done. One of the jobs of the Secretary is to keep track of the LAN itself. That can’t happen if he/she is sitting out front, away from the activities. Imagine if I were not allowed in the room in which meetings took place. The Minutes Thread would be aweful. Even before I took the job I never saw a Secretary tooling around at the table, so I’m not sitting there either. Period.
At the same time, it is more convienient to post LAN Attendance in the same thread as LAN Winners. I don’t create two seperate threads for Meeting Minutes and Meeting Attendance. I think the Constitution needs to be amended to make things more consistent. I’ll type up a proposition and read my thoughts on the matter at the next meeting.
Bottom Line: We’ll discuss it at the next meeting.
It’s not a huge issue, but there is some serious ambiguity right now as to who is supposed to handle the attendance report. The way the Constitution is currently set up, all attendance related issues fall under the authority of the Secretary, just as all financial issues fall under the authority of the Treasurer. I see no reason to change the way things are currently set up, but for the sake of convienience and consistency, I should be the one to report LAN attendance in the same thread as the tournament winners, as I report meeting attendance in the minutes thread. This is why I asked Nalgenie for the attendance sheet at the end of the LAN. She told me she would send it to me, but didn’t.
It may be neccessary to make the Constitution slightly more clear as to who handles LAN attendance. I also want to point out that just before I became Secretary, I was assured that I could be in any tournament I wished and I wouldn’t have to worry about the attendance until after the LAN was over, at which point I just had to get the sheet from the Treasurer. If I end up stuck at the front desk for most of the next LAN, I will not be running for Secretary again, because I actually like to play games and socialize during LAN Events.
There was a serious lack of fliers this last time. I heard there was some sort of problem with printing.
The date was a bit unfortunate, what with some other events taking place at the same time. Even though the turnout was smaller than usual, it was still a lot of fun.
If I sat at the table the whole time, it might be difficult to keep track of the LAN itself. Maybe it should get brought up at the next meeting.
Edit: Looking through the archives, meeting minutes have been reported on by the Secretary for years. There is no reason why the LANs should work differently. If the other executives want me to stay at the front table for more of the LAN, I could give it a go, but that would make getting information a little less convienient. As things are currently set up, I can ask the president, vice president, ext. at any time how long a given tournament is going to take and if there is a winner yet. One of my jobs is to keep track of the LAN itself. It’s hard to do this if I’m not even in the same room.
Also, if there is an error, fixing it is as simple as making a quick edit. At that bottom of the first post of the most recent LAN Result Thread I say “If you see a mistake, just send me a PM and I will fix it.”
Admitedly, this is all minutiae, but I like to work out who has responsibility over what.
At the end of the LAN I asked Nalgenie “Can I get a copy of the attendance sheet.” She said, “I’ll email it to you.” It didn’t happen.
After the controversy that surrounded the attendance of the last LAN, I’d like for it to be officially established how, and by whom, the LAN attendance is reported. After every meeting, I report the attendance in the Minutes Thread. Wouldn’t I do the same thing for the LANs?
Palin´s daugher becoming pregnant has absolutely nothing to do with her policy-making abilities. Even if the daughter made a mistake and got pregnant, that does not mean all people who are taught abstinence are destined to make the same mistake. Besides, she´s keeping the baby and marrying the father, so she is taking responsibility for her actions. This entire issue is a ridiculous personal attack, just like the accusations that Palin didn’t take prenatal care or the false rumors of book-banning.
One of the very few things the Mccain campaign did right was elect Sarah Palin. She was able to endear herself to conservatives and expressed her principals in a dignified and honest fashion. The main reason she takes so much abuse by the media and the left in general is because she does not fit in with the modern liberal ideal; she is a successful woman who chooses to behave conservatively. Sarah Palin has a place in the future of conservatism; I hesitate to say the same thing about John McCain.
And how, exactly, do you know what Sarah Palin taught her daughter in the privacy of their own home?
Dice, you can post all the food-genitalia you want. Just don’t complain when somebody else posts something nsfw.
YouWinGameOver said:
She has a daughter that has a child on the way but will not abort it and didnt know about conmdoms because Palin believes in abstinence.Forgive me if I misread you, but did you just say that Palin’s daughter’s decision to give birth was stupid?
The idea of a debate is that you state your opinions on an issue. Your oponent searchs for flaws in your arguments, then states why they think you are wrong. Then you defend your initial position. Over time, truths become clear. If you state no examples of faulty information, nobody will take the accusation seriously. If nothing else, some people get to blow off some steam.
I like this thread. It’s cool to see the back-and-forth between debaters. It is a conversation. It is as far from a flame war as you can get.
This debate is worthy and both sides are raising valid points. The idea that we have to know every single thing about each other in order to hold a decent debate makes no sense. If it were true, then nobody could ever debate anything, because they have never been inside their opponent’s head. If anyone thinks that somebody has given false information, call them on it and explain why it is wrong. That is how a debate works.
I’m just saying, this is a healthy debate and there is no reason to end it prematurely.
To choose to give to those in need is charity. To be forced to give excessivley is socialism.
Despite our current problems, free-market capitalism has been extremely succesful in the United States. An incentive of high-rewards breeds motivation for hard work. Obama has said flat-out that he does not appreciate the way the constitution is set up, because it does not allow much room for wealth-redistribution (a form of socialism). He wishes to infuse elements of a contrary economic system into a functioning (although weakened) capitalist economy.
Admitedly, I am not an expert on economics, but I know enough to understand when I am about to get screwed.
I’m not a fan of political arguments on the forums, so I think this will be my last comment on the subject.
I don’t like Obama as a person, but that is not why I am pessimistic about what he’ll do as president. My pessimism is based on his policies, which range from abstract to silly to ghoulish.
I am willing to respect the office of the president in that I accept that Obama will have the authority of the executive branch. However, Obama’s short track record gives me reason enough to be pessimistic about his coming presidency. Further, after a year-and-a-half of hearing him not answer questions, I can’t just flip a switch on my back and start singing his praises.
Oh, and I’d like to be Secretary again. It’s a lot of fun, although It’s annoying how my threads keep getting locked.
the “historic” angel of the election does not go very far with me. Who cares if Obama is the first black president if he is unqualified? If Obama’s race is unimportant, then there is no need to celebrate it.
I will respect the office of the President, but I will not respect Barack Obama. For the next four years, I will be watching him like a hawk.
Kap: It was a joke. Laugh it up. I didn’t even say I was going anywhere.
McCain was never a good presidential candidate. He ran a terrible campaign and was unable to appeal to his own conservative base. Further, he represented a disastrous trend of Republicans trying to appeal to the left. It’s not exactly a shock he lost.
Oh, well. At least Franken lost.
