- xibbog
- Registered User
-
Member for 16 years, 7 months, and 18 days
Last active Mon, Dec, 28 2009 04:52:46
- 0 Followers
- 167 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
-
Jun 23, 2008xibbog posted a message on Blizzard Posts Teaser Timeline!This is mostly just bones now.Posted in: News
-
Jun 21, 2008xibbog posted a message on XFire Slips WWI Game Announcement?Posted in: NewsQuote from "Schism" »Sooo wut u doing here ?
Same thing as everyone else: hoping I'm wrong! -
Jun 21, 2008xibbog posted a message on XFire Slips WWI Game Announcement?Sadly, there doesn't seem to be enough noise. I don't expect a D3 to be announced unfortunately.Posted in: News
-
May 28, 2008xibbog posted a message on Blizzcon 2008 AnnouncedPosted in: News
Hear hear.Quote from "Schism" »I blame the 1st of may announcement . -
May 28, 2008xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com becomes Diablofans.com! Blizzard acquires diablo3.com.Posted in: News
-
Apr 30, 2008xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com becomes Diablofans.com! Blizzard acquires diablo3.com.Posted in: NewsQuote from "LordRayken" »Believe it or not, months before Starcraft2 was announced, Blizzard did the same thing with all the Starcraft two related domains as well. They bought them all.
But not starcraft2.com
Blizzard have owned starcraft2.com since at least 2002 (archive.org) and probably as far back as 1999 (domaintools.com)
Check the domain history. -
Apr 30, 2008xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com becomes Diablofans.com! Blizzard acquires diablo3.com.It would also be nice if the announcement actually coincided with diablo3.com changing hands. But it didn't. As yet Blizzard still don't own diablo3.com.Posted in: News
-
Apr 30, 2008xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com becomes Diablofans.com! Blizzard acquires diablo3.com.Posted in: NewsQuote from "LordRayken" »Ohh, would it be hard for Blizzard to do a Diablo3.com just like Starcraft2.com?
Two Thousand and Sixteen -
Apr 30, 2008xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com becomes Diablofans.com! Blizzard acquires diablo3.com.123456789Posted in: News
-
Apr 30, 2008xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com becomes Diablofans.com! Blizzard acquires diablo3.com.Hype does not deliver.Posted in: News
Respect lost.
Also, as I posted in the other thread:
Quote from "xibbog" »Actually it looks as though [Blizzard have] owned [starcraft2.com] since 1999:
http://whois.domaintools.com/starcraft2.com
Created on: 24-Sep-99
If that's correct, and Blizzard acquires diablo3.com tomorrow, then we will see Diablo 3 in 2016?
Sure D3 might be announced on June 29 but this acquisition adds bugger all weight to that. We could well be waiting until 2016 for D3.
-
Aug 3, 2007xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com Attending BlizzconPosted in: NewsQuote from name="Little Boy" »Blizzard is supposed to announce TWO formerly unannounced games at Blizzcon.
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but do you happen have a link to the source of this handy? -
Aug 3, 2007xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com Attending BlizzconPosted in: News
That puts that theory to bed.
The end.
No D3 at BlizzCon 07. -
Aug 3, 2007xibbog posted a message on Diablo3.com Attending BlizzconOn the other hand Occam's razor predicts no love for the Diablo faithful. Hope that isn't the case however!Posted in: News
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
All I said was I bet you think Hitler was elected. I was right.
0
You recall incorrectly. As Jetrall has already pointed out, Hitler was reluctantly appointed chancellor by Hindenburg.
0
Hitler was never elected. I bet money that you think he was.
0
Obama wins.
0
You want to talk about Obama's plans on tax, yet when I show you Obama's plans on tax you say it's biased and not an independent source. You're right. Do you know why you're right? It's because they are HIS plans. I can't give you his plans from somebody else because that would be impossible and stupid. This is what is called policy.
As for accepted conceptual definitions in the social science and the global state of universal health care, if you don't lke Wikipedia you can visit and read the documents referenced at the bottom of the Wikipedia pages.
I already addressed your second point. You already made it. I addressed it with specific tax policy and attacked your usage of concepts that have established definitions from the political and social sciences. You failed to respond to both the specific tax policy and your misuse of the concept of socialism. Instead you posited the nonsensical position I just addressed.
Continuing at this point would serve little meaningful purpose unless you can address issues I have raised with you as you have demonstrated a clear unwillingness or inability to engage in logical and reasoned rational argument.
But let's indulge a little and discuss this statement "he wants to punish the rich for being successful" in which you twist his position to promote an evocative idea that does not accurately reflect the facts using emotive language and invoking class warfare.
You'll need to refer to his tax policy for this one. Under the Bush administration higher income earners have been receiving disproportionately larger tax breaks relative to income (that last phrase is important, make sure you know how to read) than lower income earners. Barack Obama's tax plan seeks to redress this imbalance. Now if we refer to our reference material in the political science section of our local university library what we will find is that this act is not a superset of the concept socialism. Nor is it analogous to socialism. It could not even be considered a subset of the concept socialism. And while yes, it could be the act of a socialist administration, it could also equally just as easily be the act of a capitalist administration.
I also draw your attention to the recent interference of the Republican government of the day in the private sector to the tune of 700 billion dollars. This too is not a socialist act (refer to my discussion of your misuse of this concept in the preceding paragraph) but for the sake of argument even if it were it would be a more socialist act (again, your definition, not mine - let's not get you all confused here) than redressing the recent taxation imbalance and by your own set of standards Obama is less capitalist than the Republican party. This however is absurd.
0
They call this a cop-out.
0
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Tax_Plan_Comparison_FINAL.pdf
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Tax_Plan_Facts_FINAL.pdf
Preferred in developed countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care
A banal statement devoid of critical thought designed to be emotive and provocative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism
It's a spectrum. You want to make it black and white in order to cultivate ignorance and fear.
0
0
0
Quality post.
0
You lap this shit up. You're a marketers wet dream. I reckon you'd buy anything. Want some astrology? WMD? Homoeopathy? John McCain?
0
Consider the debate stifled.
0
Less than ten posts? Check!
Joined in June? Check!
Extremely upset by anyone even slightly critical of what we've seen of Diablo III so far? Check!
A penchant to misrepresent the position of those who offer critical feedback in an extreme way -- "No Blizzard it's all wrong! Scrap all of it and start again!" -- ? Check!
Afraid that being critical is going to upset Blizzard and they will just stop making Diablo III? Check!
And finally:
Not true fans who are happy to play whatever game is flavour of the month (and with that in mind wouldn't even care if the changes proposed by those being critical are introduced so why they care is a mystery)? CHECK!
0
0
Clearly you disagree with the premise of this thread. As is your prerogative. But many people agree with it and can provide completely rational arguments to back it up so it's not a completely insane position.
I understand where you're coming from and to that I say that yes Blizzard has most things right, but I personally would like them to make the world a little more gritty. I am just giving feedback. Your feedback would probably be something more like "Dear Blizzard the art direction is perfect". And that's fine, that's your opinion, to which you are entitled. But I see little point in just telling people, who hold a different position to you, that they are just plain wrong. That's just a complete waste of time and nobody learns anything.
I assume Blizzard appreciates constructive criticism and they can choose to either take it on-board or disregard it. It's their choice, and they are adults, they don't need you to protect them from criticism in case their feelings get hurt.
I half expect this to fall on deaf ears only to be greeted once again with a ranting stream of nonsensical straw-man attacks.