- Frigid
- Registered User
-
Member for 16 years, 8 months, and 15 days
Last active Wed, May, 23 2012 09:08:51
- 0 Followers
- 266 Total Posts
- 1 Thank
-
Mar 15, 2012Frigid posted a message on Diablo III Launching May 15 – Digital Pre-Sales NOW OPENI've been waiting to post in this thread for many, many years. FVKIN FINALLY!Posted in: News
-
Jan 26, 2012Frigid posted a message on New Information , Hardcore, Option Tooltips, Clock, End of Beta Contest, 5000 bugs, Error 3022So we'll all be playing D3 in April... hopefully.Posted in: News
-
Oct 7, 2010Frigid posted a message on Iron Maidenahahah Iron Maiden, I get it!Posted in: News
looks very nice, fitting for a barbarian, still looks somewhat feminine despite the massive armor and shoulder pads -
Oct 5, 2010Frigid posted a message on Wizard in Plate MailPosted in: NewsQuote from ScyberDragon
As scheduled, Blizzard has released the a new armor set. This time it is the female Wizard featured in a red plate mail armor. It is interesting to see how something as "heavy" as plate mail we be worn buy someone of a lighter feel. Keep in mind that every class will be able to wear every type of armor. While still keeping the plate mail, they have also incorporated the robes of the wizard keeping its unique look to the class.
*by
you're welcome :sorcerer: -
May 6, 2008Frigid posted a message on Diablo3.com becomes Diablofans.com! Blizzard acquires diablo3.com.wow thats awesome newsPosted in: News
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
I'm not complaining about the hardxcoreness of it, gore is whatever. It's more the "vibe" and just overall feeling you get when you play the game, I feel like they didn't capture that feeling in D3, and that picture I posted has that vibe.
Listen to some Opeth to get a general idea
0
Like...
why can't diablo 3 look like this?
WHYYYYY!?!? :sad:
also, where did this come from? It's very different than the first round of images which were just fuzzy and dark, this is just...epicly awesome
0
I hadnt seen that first picture before...
I just came my pants
and then cried because that's not how diablo will look...
That first picture has so much awesome in it I cant even put it into words
Its PERFECT
0
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/65988.php
0
A group of scientists in the UK were recently given money by the government to research drug classification.
Their proposed system of classification assesses harm in an "evidence-based fashion". They use three main factors to determine the potential harm that a substance causes:
(1) Physical harm to the user,
(2) Tendency to induce dependence in the user, and
(3) The effect of its use on families, communities and society in general.
In order of overall harm, the 20 drugs were given the following ranking (the most harmful, heroin at number 1 scored nearly 3, while the least harmful khat at number 20 scored less than 1):
(1) Heroin (most harmful).
(2) Cocaine.
(3) Barbiturates.
(4) Street Methodone.
(5) Alcohol.
(6) Ketamine.
(7) Benzodiazepines.
(8) Amphetamine.
(9) Tobacco.
(10) Buprenorphine.
(11) Cannabis.
(12) Solvents.
(13) 4-MTA (para-methylthioamphetamine).
(14) LSD.
(15) Methylphenidate (ritalin).
(16) Anabolic steroids.
(17) GHB (gamma hydroxybutyric acid).
(18) Ecstasy.
(19) Alkyl nitrites.
(20) Khat (least harmful).
So according to UK government research, you're better off taking ecstasy than your ADD or anti-anxiety pills!
This research was brushed under the carpet for the implications it would have on drug policy. In the past decade Portugal has decriminalized ALL drugs and has focused on rehabilitation instead of putting drug users in jail. Every measurable statistic regarding drug use/death/incarceration has improved VASTLY by decriminalizing everything. In Massachusetts, my home state, leaving your dogs shit in a park is a $150 fine, having 28 grams of weed is a $100 dollar fine. Instead of ruining a students future by charging them with possession (kills all chance at financial aid), they get fined and are told to go on their way.
So what is your opinion on drug policy?
0
I don't think you really have any place passing judgment on "the public" or imposing your "values" onto other people. People can make choices about their lifestyles and habits for themselves, it's not yours, or anyone's place to tell others how to live their lives.
Personally, I had a 1.6 gpa in high school, nearly had to repeat my junior year. I had been prescribed ADHD medication though I don't have ADD I just hated school like most kids, and thanks to the pharmaceutical industry hundreds of thousands of normal teenagers, usually boys, are cracked out on amphetamines because they didn't see any value in memorize historical dates when you can just look them up on google.
I did well on my SAT's, got into college, started smoking weed, stopped taking ADD meds. I got a 4.0 my freshman year and transferred to a much better school. It has taken me roughly 2 years of regularly smoking to get rid of the anxiety which I think was caused by being on amphetamine pills for 4 years when I shouldn't have been. My GPA is at a 3.7 now and I'm interning for a congressman this spring in DC (hides personal info).
I probably would have dropped out of college had I not started smoking and had continued taking those pills.
I've been charged with possession twice (in my home state, not picking up after your dog's shit in a park is a 150 dollar fine, possession of 28 grams of marijuana is a 100 dollar fine)
Anyone who thinks I'm a criminal or a loser for smoking has their values completely off.
Marijuana should be legalized, taxed, and regulated. There should be efforts made to keep it away from younger kids, but honestly a bag of weed is easier to get than a 12 pack in most high schools.
So do you really like using billions in taxpayer dollars to arrest normal people who choose to smoke marijuana?, instead of raising billions of dollars in tax money and saving people billions in prescription drug costs for drugs like xanax, oxycontin, klonopin, and other expensive anti-anxiety and pain medications who have serious side effects (potential long term psychological effects as well). Marijuana is free to grow, it's illegal for money reasons. The beer industry in California is campaigning against legalization, just imagine what big pharma companies are paying to keep it away from people.
Anti-pot people, you can frankly go %$^@ yourselves
0
Just kidding I'm in college, I just hope it comes out near/during this coming summer (and not between January and May of 2011, because I'll be studying abroad in Scotland).
0
http://www.digitalstormonline.com/gaminglaptops.asp
Digital storm has an A+ rating from the Better Business Bureau, You could probably get a laptop of equal quality that's many many hundreds of dollars less than alienware.
0
1
0
Look, zeitgeist is filled with many factual inaccuracies, misquotes, and outright lies. I understand why you'd like to believe that there's a secret cabal of international bankers and corporate heads who secretly control things, you feel somewhat helpless in a sea of the 24 hour news cycle, backwards 2000 year old religions, corporate greed, and political corruption. But, you are just as stupid as someone who believes the earth was created in 7 days, you're looking for a simple answer that appeals to your emotions, not your rational thought. Once you get a degree in political science and economics, THEN tell me that the federal reserve is robbing Americans of money and conspiring to eventually form a one world government.
There are several problems with a conspiratorial view that don't fit with what we know about power structures. First, it assumes that a small handful of wealthy and highly educated people somehow develop an extreme psychological desire for power that leads them to do things that don't fit with the roles they seem to have. For example, that rich capitalists are no longer out to make a profit, but to create a one-world government. Or that elected officials are trying to get the constitution suspended so they can assume dictatorial powers. These kinds of claims go back many decades now, and it is always said that it is really going to happen this time, but it never does. Since these claims have proved wrong dozens of times by now, it makes more sense to assume that leaders act for their usual reasons, such as profit-seeking motives and institutionalized roles as elected officials. Of course they want to make as much money as they can, and be elected by huge margins every time, and that can lead them to do many unsavory things, but nothing in the ballpark of creating a one-world government or suspending the constitution.
0
0
Though I have watched it, and agree with many of the points he brings up. Its a hypocritical piece of crap that uses even worse propaganda techniques than he accuses the elites and mainstream media of. Sorry.
0
0