If you're going to be an obnoxious prick, please at least get your names right. Her name is Jeri Ryan. And I actually lost interest in Voyager for quite a while - it just couldn't keep my attention. However, with a few exceptions, Enterprise has kept my attention. I know this is just my opinion, but I enjoy Enterprise. Here's the key to enjoying it: Try being a little more open minded. If people would stop looking at Enterprise as another sequel/prequel in the Trek series, and evaluate it simply as a SciFi television show that has tie-ins with Star Trek, they'd probably enjoy it more. Enterprise is more about looking forward from where we are now than looking back from the other series, though it has elements of both. The last few episodes have been quite wonderful, a step above the rest, it's a shame to see it cancelled now.
Yes, the original Carmageddon is on my "best games of all time" list, and Burnout 3 is the first game to recapture the fun I had with it. You mention Carmageddon 2, but it while it had much better graphics, the controls and the damage felt...stiff and clunky, not anything like Carmageddon 1, I hated it. Carmageddon TDR 2000 came closer to the controls of the original but not quite...nothing beats the original.
In the Play Games menu, right-click on Half-Life 2, and then click on Properties. For it to work without internet, it has to say "Offline mode: Ready". If it says this and still won't work offline, try the steam (steampowered.com) forums or perhaps the planethalflife (planethalflife.com) forums, chances are someone there can help you.
I have the FusionHDTV3 card you're speaking of. It works great for both over-the-air and QAM in-the-clear broadcasts, but doesn't solve the original problem of being able to hook up a set top box. The reason for the disclaimer on the QAM ability is because earlier revisions of the card had many problems decoding QAM. The newest versions seem to work pretty flawlessly from what I've seen, as long as you have quality cable all the way to the card - QAM256 is so tightly compressed that it's especially sensitive to signal loss.
First of all, this question should be re-worded immediately. Secondly, this would make a good exercise, but it's a horrible question. Despite that, I would be interested to hear what their responses would be.
I think this is a valid question that would provide valuable information. However, I would suggest incorporating the changes listed in the above comments to make the question more accurate.
I like this question because it basically asks "if you have enough free time to campaign like you do, when do you get any work done? what are we paying you so much for?" I wouldn't mind hearing their answers.
It shouldn't fall on government to foot the bill for women having babies. Doing something like this would basically say that as long as you keep having children, we'll keep mailing you a check for free. Not only that, but it further discourages planned parenthood. If you want to be off work for a specified amount of time to raise the child, I suggest that you put back the money required to do that before you decide to have the child. That said, this is a good question, because if the president wants to cater to the freeloaders of the nation, I want to know BEFORE I vote him into office. I would rephrase it though so that it doesn't lead the candidate into giving the response the original poser of the question wants to hear.
A more open-ended question would probably get a better response. My suggestion would be: "In light of the possibility that Iran and North Korea may have nuclear weapons in the near future, what are your plans to protect our national security from these possible threats?" This not only allows them to say what they would do to stop the development of the weapons, but it also asks what they will do if they can't stop the development.
Of course it would make it harder. A better question would be, "Under what circumstances, if any, would you deem it necessary to declare war on a rising nuclear power such as Iran or North Korea?"
The subject matter seems valid, but the phrasing is HORRIBLE. Try this: "What effect will the war in Iraq have on military funding during your presidency?". Not perfect, but at least that makes it a question.
If an immigration question is to be asked, I don't think it should focus on this specific area - it should be included, but not be the sole focus of the question. Also, you're supposed to be asking for their opinion on the issue, not "when will these bills be addressed".
The topic is valid, but the comment on it negatively impacting the US's economy seems a bit out there. This is something I would like to have an answer to, though, it's about time we gravitate towards metric more than we have. Not phase out the english system, but allow them to coexist (i'm thinking road signs, etc) for the moment so we have access to BOTH measures equally.
The president doesn't cause or prevent divorces, people do. The most a president could do is call on people to go to marriage therapy or something before considering divorce. It's not a horrible question, it just doesn't seem to be something a president has the power to fix, therefore it's not appropriate.
This is a good question, though I think the likelyhood of high schoolers NOT knowing sex gets you pregnant is quite low. The second sentence makes me not want to take the question seriously. Perhaps the first part should be rephrased: "In high school, I saw many of my peers drop out because of teenage pregnancy. What is your opinion..."
Slashdot Mirror
If you're going to be an obnoxious prick, please at least get your names right. Her name is Jeri Ryan. And I actually lost interest in Voyager for quite a while - it just couldn't keep my attention.
However, with a few exceptions, Enterprise has kept my attention. I know this is just my opinion, but I enjoy Enterprise.
Here's the key to enjoying it:
Try being a little more open minded. If people would stop looking at Enterprise as another sequel/prequel in the Trek series, and evaluate it simply as a SciFi television show that has tie-ins with Star Trek, they'd probably enjoy it more. Enterprise is more about looking forward from where we are now than looking back from the other series, though it has elements of both.
The last few episodes have been quite wonderful, a step above the rest, it's a shame to see it cancelled now.
Yes, the original Carmageddon is on my "best games of all time" list, and Burnout 3 is the first game to recapture the fun I had with it. You mention Carmageddon 2, but it while it had much better graphics, the controls and the damage felt...stiff and clunky, not anything like Carmageddon 1, I hated it. Carmageddon TDR 2000 came closer to the controls of the original but not quite...nothing beats the original.
In the Play Games menu, right-click on Half-Life 2, and then click on Properties. For it to work without internet, it has to say "Offline mode: Ready". If it says this and still won't work offline, try the steam (steampowered.com) forums or perhaps the planethalflife (planethalflife.com) forums, chances are someone there can help you.
I have the FusionHDTV3 card you're speaking of. It works great for both over-the-air and QAM in-the-clear broadcasts, but doesn't solve the original problem of being able to hook up a set top box.
The reason for the disclaimer on the QAM ability is because earlier revisions of the card had many problems decoding QAM. The newest versions seem to work pretty flawlessly from what I've seen, as long as you have quality cable all the way to the card - QAM256 is so tightly compressed that it's especially sensitive to signal loss.
Very good question. I look forward to seeing the answer!
First of all, this question should be re-worded immediately.
Secondly, this would make a good exercise, but it's a horrible question. Despite that, I would be interested to hear what their responses would be.
this question sucks, it has no informational value whatsoever.
I think this is a valid question that would provide valuable information. However, I would suggest incorporating the changes listed in the above comments to make the question more accurate.
Nix the first sentence, then you've got a good question.
This question is quite similar to the previous question, though wider in scope. Perhaps the two should be combined.
This is a very relevant question. Good job.
I like this question because it basically asks "if you have enough free time to campaign like you do, when do you get any work done? what are we paying you so much for?"
I wouldn't mind hearing their answers.
It shouldn't fall on government to foot the bill for women having babies. Doing something like this would basically say that as long as you keep having children, we'll keep mailing you a check for free. Not only that, but it further discourages planned parenthood. If you want to be off work for a specified amount of time to raise the child, I suggest that you put back the money required to do that before you decide to have the child.
That said, this is a good question, because if the president wants to cater to the freeloaders of the nation, I want to know BEFORE I vote him into office. I would rephrase it though so that it doesn't lead the candidate into giving the response the original poser of the question wants to hear.
A more open-ended question would probably get a better response.
My suggestion would be: "In light of the possibility that Iran and North Korea may have nuclear weapons in the near future, what are your plans to protect our national security from these possible threats?"
This not only allows them to say what they would do to stop the development of the weapons, but it also asks what they will do if they can't stop the development.
This is an excellent question.
Of course it would make it harder.
A better question would be, "Under what circumstances, if any, would you deem it necessary to declare war on a rising nuclear power such as Iran or North Korea?"
The subject matter seems valid, but the phrasing is HORRIBLE.
Try this: "What effect will the war in Iraq have on military funding during your presidency?". Not perfect, but at least that makes it a question.
If an immigration question is to be asked, I don't think it should focus on this specific area - it should be included, but not be the sole focus of the question.
Also, you're supposed to be asking for their opinion on the issue, not "when will these bills be addressed".
The topic is valid, but the comment on it negatively impacting the US's economy seems a bit out there. This is something I would like to have an answer to, though, it's about time we gravitate towards metric more than we have. Not phase out the english system, but allow them to coexist (i'm thinking road signs, etc) for the moment so we have access to BOTH measures equally.
The president doesn't cause or prevent divorces, people do. The most a president could do is call on people to go to marriage therapy or something before considering divorce. It's not a horrible question, it just doesn't seem to be something a president has the power to fix, therefore it's not appropriate.
Aren't most education policy questions left to state governments? I don't think it's presidential debate material.
This is a good question, though I think the likelyhood of high schoolers NOT knowing sex gets you pregnant is quite low. The second sentence makes me not want to take the question seriously. Perhaps the first part should be rephrased: "In high school, I saw many of my peers drop out because of teenage pregnancy. What is your opinion..."
You hit the nail on the head here.
this question sounds too emotional to be taken seriously. no useful information can be gained by asking the candidates this question.
Here's the slashdot story.
And here's the original blog posting.