Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

cossieuk

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    3,535

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

Posts posted by cossieuk

  1. Posted · Report reply

    11 hours ago, Amenhir said:

    Streaming a game you're bad at can be quite entertaining to watch.  However, I wouldn't expect someone like that to give out advice on how to play.  There is also that most important of components, personality, and she has none.  She's bad at the game, but she doles out advice like she's an expert.

    It really depends on if they know they are bad  at the game.  Many people thing they are good when they suck

  2. Posted · Report reply

    Given the large number of people already having to use food banks, an estimated 590,000 in 2016-2017, and the large number of people in fuel poverty, around 11.1% of homes in England in 2016 which is around 2.55 million people any policy that is going to increase them is just stupid.  

    https://news.sky.com/story/operation-yellowhammer-government-no-deal-brexit-documents-released-11807339

    Lets not forget 

    Medicine supplies will be "particularly vulnerable to severe extended delays" - Sorry folks that medicine you need it is stuck at the border 

    Possible clashes between UK and EU fishing vessels

    The possibility of urgent action to ensure access to clean water if there is a failure in the supply of chemicals - although the likelihood of this is considered "low" - Might be low but not work risking

  3. Posted · Report reply

    8 hours ago, Doro said:

    It's not a lie, though. We paid around £18 billion to the EU before the rebate, and that's £350 million a week. The bus didn't mention anything about whether that was net or gross.

    The rebate is taken off what we are due to pay before we pay anything.  So we at no point ever sent £350 million per week.  Just like if you buy something that is on sale, you dont pay the full price then have them refund your money

  4. Posted · Report reply

    34 minutes ago, Doro said:

    It wasn't a massive lie, though. We did send £350 million a week to the EU, and it would be nice to put some of that into the NHS. Where's the lie there?

    Except the £350 million figure is a lie.  It 2018 we paid around £13 billion to the EU, this is after the rebate which is deducted before we pay anything, this is £250 million a week.  In the EU spent around £4.2 billion in the public sector in the UK in 2018.  I can only find a figure from 2016 for what they pay to the private sector which is £2.3 billion, if we assume this is a average yearly amount then the UK has a net contribution of £6.5 billion or £125 million a week.  The figure was a lie which many people still believe.  

  5. Posted · Report reply

    9 minutes ago, Doro said:

    1. There's multiple options for Leaving that they could put on there, but one option for staying, so immediately that's dividing up the opposition to the EU to make it easier for Remain to get a "majority" over the smaller groups.

    Multi question referendum.  First question, Leave or Stay.  Second Question, if leave then deal or no deal.  Second question only counts if first question gets leave

    14 minutes ago, Doro said:

    2. We've had three years of fear-mongering and anti-Brexit rhetoric, which is obviously going to impact a margin of people who are going to swallow that as though it was Brexit's fault, which is what the Remain crowd have been wanting all along. They want the false equivalency of delays and hysteria to be considered "Brexit", without it actually happening.

    We have had 3 years of lies about how once we leave everything will be so much better.  So many lies about the EU.  I hate that anytime anyone points out a negative about leaving the EU it is called scare-mongering.  The last 3 years have been about 2 sides shouting at each other and no body talking about the real issues about brexit.

    13 minutes ago, Doro said:

    3. At the very least, we need the results of the first referendum honoured, otherwise what's the point of it at all? Indefinitely delaying it and then overturning it would be a bigger nail in the coffin of democracy than a Queen's speech is.

    The referendum was advisory so there was never any need to follow the result.

    14 minutes ago, Doro said:

    4. When do we stop with referendums? Only when we get a Remain (or Re-join) vote that's considered acceptable to the establishment? Best of three? Five? Or do we simply have a referendum every few years forever because things change over 3 years and people might want something different?

    How about when we have a referendum where neither side breach electoral law.  Leading to a judge declaring that have the referendum being binding he would have had to overturn the result do the the illegal actions of the leave campaign.  Remember the bus with £350 million for the NHS which was a massive lie

     

    16 minutes ago, Doro said:

    I don't recall any mention on the ballot of "Leave (but only with a deal)", or any other stipulations. In fact, I don't recall much of the various Leave campaigns at all (outside of the sensationalised stuff that kept getting rinsed on the news for). I got a hell of a lot of pro-EU propaganda through the door, but then again my area is apparently considered a Labour stronghold so I guess they were trying to preach to the choir.

    Might not have been on the ballot, but the leave campaign constantly said we would get a deal.  No one was talking about no deal.  Many people have expressed since that they only wanted out with a deal

    I got little from either side, being in Scotland that is not really a surprise.

  6. Posted · Report reply

    2 minutes ago, Doro said:

    That dangerous precedent being that maybe the will of the majority will finally get delivered when the MPs that keep getting in the way are told to fuck off. There's no democracy while MPs keep refusing to deliver Brexit, so Parliament might as well get suspended until we can restart outside of the EU.

    I doubt the will of the people is a no deal brexit.  Not one brexit mp of senor member of any of the leave groups campaigned for a no deal brexit, they all said that we would get a good deal.  Now the same people are saying that we must leave come hell or high water, with some saying that no deal is the only acceptable option.

    Put the options to the public and see what they want, No deal, some deal or no brexit.  Make the referendum binding unlike the last one

  7. Posted · Report reply

    It doesn't matter if you are anti brexit, pro brexit or pro no deal, what is happening is an unelected PM is suspending the democratic parliament to try and push thought a policy that he knows MP's would vote to stop.  This sets a dangerous precedent 

     

  11. Posted · Report reply

    We all have a breaking point, but when you have just pissed off your player bases with a loot box scam and they called you out on it, maybe calling them ass-hats is not the best way to apologise.  I suspect many off us here have had to deal with horrible customers at some point, but I doubt many would have say anything to the customer.  Bitch about them internally with other staff but not to their face.  That is a sure fire way to loose players

    • Upvote 1

  14. Posted · Report reply

    Given that the racial traits are so small and insignificant, what is the benefit of a new race other that the look slightly different.

    As for the ability to change race, class restrictions applying, who has reached max level playing one race that they didnt like.  Surely you would notice you didnt like the look of that race when you were still in the starter zone and reroll

  15. Posted · Report reply

    1 hour ago, LasraelLarson said:

    ONLY during world cup cycles do the womens US team generate more revenue than US men.  So that is the year 2015 and this year 2019.  just those 2 years they generated more revenue then the mens teams, tied directly to the World cup.  when you include the years that there is no world cup, over all the men generate almost double the revenues of the women's teams.  2013, 2014, 2016, 2017 & 2018 the US women's teams did NOT generate more revenue than the US mens teams.

     

    From 2016-2018 the woman's team had earning of $50.5 million where as the men's team generated $49.9 million.  This is not during the world cup.  Given the world cup this year I would guess that they would be higher again this year for the women.  These figures are from audited financial statements from the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) as seen by the Wall Street Journal.  In 2016 the Women generated $1.9 million more than the men

  16. Posted · Report reply

    58 minutes ago, Altreg01 said:

    I really dont want to wade into this quagmire, but that wrestling pic that is a biological female that wants to wrestle against MALES but isnt allowed, and far as equal pay our (Im American) women's team is heads and shoulders above our men's mess and probably deserves more pay, they actually win games.  I do not follow traditional football, but Im pretty sure our men's team has never made it out of the first round (if thats the correct terminology) whereas our women's team is 4? times WC champs? I have no idea who pays theys players, but strictly speaking US Women's Soccer >>> US Men's. When you wade into other sports, they are strictly capitalistic ventures and no way could the WNBA command NBA salaries, attendance and other figures prove it, but with the US National Soccer Teams the opposite is totally true

    The men's team came 3rd in the first ever world cup in 1930.  Since then the best they have done is quarter finals.  Other than this they seem to go between not getting out of the group stage and getting out of the group but them losing the next match.  Although it must be said the standard of woman's football worldwide leaves a lot to be desired.  Too many countires don't give a crap about it, unlike the US.

    The Woman's team bring in more money then the men's team but they get paid less, that is wrong.  In the past the argument that the men's game brought in more money so they got paid more was commonly used, and for good reason, but that is no longer a valid argument.

    At club level it is a different story.

  19. Posted · Report reply

    8 hours ago, Doro said:

    If they go for a microtransaction model like the last one, I wouldn't be surprised. It's everywhere now, and mostly seems designed to exploit kids.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48925623

    What makes me laugh is that these stories are all about how stupid kids are getting hold of their parents' bank details and spending hundreds, if not thousands, on a game... meanwhile in LotRO we've got supposed adults likely spending the same. Literally duped like these kids, but too caught up in their Stockholm syndrome to realise they've been exploited. At least the kids have the excuse of being ridiculously naive and idiotic.

    I love the one who says they are technically savvy but didnt think to put a password on

    • Upvote 1

  22. Posted · Report reply

    3 hours ago, Doro said:

     In fact, MMOs in general seem to be getting less and less attention from gamers on the boards I visit.

    I wonder how much of that is due to younger gamer's being more interested in games like Fortnight and Apex Legends.  People that grew up playing MMOs now dont have the time to spend playing them like they used to

×